{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_43847/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_43847","id":"gutenberg_43847","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43847","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Minor Prophets -- Commentaries","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE. Edited by Rev.\n\n W. R. NICOLL, D.D., Editor of _London Expositor_.\n\n\n 1ST SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =MACLAREN, Rev. Alex.=--COLOSSIANS--PHILEMON.\n =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GENESIS.\n =CHADWICK, Rev. Dean.=--ST. MARK.\n =BLAIKIE, Rev. W. G.=--SAMUEL, 2 VOLS.\n =EDWARDS, Rev. T. C.=--HEBREWS.\n\n\n 2D SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--ISAIAH, VOL. I.\n =ALEXANDER, Bishop.=--EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN.\n =PLUMMER, Rev. A.=--PASTORAL EPISTLES.\n =FINDLAY, Rev. G. G.=--GALATIANS.\n =MILLIGAN, Rev. W.=--REVELATION.\n =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--1ST CORINTHIANS.\n\n\n 3D SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--ISAIAH, VOL. II.\n =GIBSON, Rev. J. M.=--ST. MATTHEW.\n =WATSON, Rev. R. A.=--JUDGES--RUTH.\n =BALL, Rev. C. J.=--JEREMIAH. CHAP. I-XX.\n =CHADWICK, Rev. Dean.=--EXODUS.\n =BURTON, Rev. H.=--ST. LUKE.\n\n\n 4TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =KELLOGG, Rev. S. H.=--LEVITICUS.\n =STOKES, Rev. G. T.=--ACTS, VOL. I.\n =HORTON, Rev. R. F.=--PROVERBS.\n =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GOSPEL ST. JOHN, VOL. I.\n =PLUMMER, Rev. A.=--JAMES--JUDE.\n =COX, Rev. S.=--ECCLESIASTES.\n\n\n 5TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =DENNEY, Rev. J.=--THESSALONIANS.\n =WATSON, Rev. R. A.=--JOB.\n =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. I.\n =STOKES, Rev. G. T.=--ACTS, VOL. II.\n =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GOSPEL ST. JOHN, VOL. II.\n =FINDLAY, Rev. C. G.=--EPHESIANS.\n\n\n 6TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =RAINY, Rev. R.=--PHILIPPIANS.\n =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--1ST KINGS.\n =BLAIKIE, Rev. W. G.=--JOSHUA.\n =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. II.\n =LUMBY, Rev, J. R.=--EPISTLES OF ST. PETER.\n =ADENEY, Rev. W. F.=--EZRA--NEHEMIAH--ESTHER.\n\n\n 7TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n =MOULE, Rev. H. C. G.=--ROMANS.\n =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--2D KINGS.\n =BENNETT, Rev. W. H.=--1ST AND 2D CHRONICLES.\n =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. III.\n =DENNEY, Rev. James.=--2D CORINTHIANS.\n =WATSON Rev. R. A.=--NUMBERS.\n\n\n 8TH AND FINAL SERIES IN 7 VOLS.\n\n =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--DANIEL.\n =SKINNER, Rev. John.=--EZEKIEL.\n =BENNETT, Rev. W. H.=--JEREMIAH.\n =HARPER, Rev. Prof.=--DEUTERONOMY.\n =ADENEY, Rev. W. F.=--SOLOMON AND LAMENTATIONS.\n =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--THE MINOR PROPHETS, 2 VOLS.\n\n\nAbout 400 pages in each Volume. Price for either series, six volumes\n$6.06. (Orders for 2 or more series at same rate will be sent by\nExpress. prepaid.) (Separate vols. $1.50 postpaid. Descriptive\ncircular sent on application.)\n\n\n\n\n THE BOOK\n\n OF\n\n THE TWELVE PROPHETS\n\n COMMONLY CALLED THE MINOR\n\n\n\n\n BY\n\n GEORGE ADAM SMITH, D.D., LL.D.\n\n PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS\n\n FREE CHURCH COLLEGE, GLASGOW\n\n\n\n\n _IN TWO VOLUMES_\n\n VOL. I.--AMOS, HOSEA AND MICAH\n\n _WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND A SKETCH OF PROPHECY\n IN EARLY ISRAEL_\n\n\n\n\n NEW YORK\n\n A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON\n\n 3 and 5 West Eighteenth Street\n\n London: Hodder and Stoughton\n\n 1906\n\n\n\n\n TO\n HENRY DRUMMOND\n\n\n\n\n PREFACE\n\n\nThe Prophets, to whom this and a following volume are dedicated,\nhave, to our loss, been haunted for centuries by a peddling and an\nambiguous title. Their Twelve Books are in size smaller than those\nof the great Three which precede them, and doubtless none of their\nchapters soar so high as the brilliant summits to which we are swept\nby Isaiah and the Prophet of the Exile. But in every other respect\nthey are undeserving of the niggardly name of \"Minor.\" Two of them,\nAmos and Hosea, were the first of all prophecy--rising cliff-like,\nwith a sheer and magnificent originality, to a height and a mass\nsufficient to set after them the trend and slope of the whole\nprophetic range. The Twelve together cover the extent of that range,\nand illustrate the development of prophecy at almost every stage from\nthe eighth century to the fourth. Yet even more than in the case of\nIsaiah or Jeremiah, the Church has been content to use a passage\nhere and a passage there, leaving the rest of the books to absolute\nneglect or the almost equal oblivion of routine-reading. Among the\ncauses of this disuse have been the more than usually corrupt state\nof the text; the consequent disorder and in parts unintelligibleness\nof all the versions; the ignorance of the various historical\ncircumstances out of which the books arose; the absence of successful\nefforts to determine the periods and strophes, the dramatic dialogues\n(with the names of the speakers), the lyric effusions and the\npassages of argument, of all of which the books are composed.\n\nThe following exposition is an attempt to assist the bettering of all\nthis. As the Twelve Prophets illustrate among them the whole history\nof written prophecy, I have thought it useful to prefix a historical\nsketch of the Prophet in early Israel, or as far as the appearance of\nAmos. The Twelve are then taken in chronological order. Under each\nof them a chapter is given of historical and critical introduction\nto his book; then some account of the prophet himself as a man and a\nseer; then a complete translation of the various prophecies handed\ndown under his name, with textual footnotes, and an exposition and\napplication to the present day in harmony with the aim of the series\nto which these volumes belong; finally, a discussion of the main\ndoctrines the prophet has taught, if it has not been found possible\nto deal with these in the course of the exposition.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAn exact critical study of the Twelve Prophets is rendered necessary\nby the state of the entire text. The present volume is based on a\nthorough examination of this in the light of the ancient versions and\nof modern criticism. The emendations which I have proposed are few\nand insignificant, but I have examined and discussed in footnotes all\nthat have been suggested, and in many cases my translation will be\nfound to differ widely from that of the Revised Version. To questions\nof integrity and authenticity more space is devoted than may seem to\nmany to be necessary. But it is certain that the criticism of the\nprophetic books has now entered on a period of the same analysis\nand discrimination which is almost exhausted in the case of the\nPentateuch. Some hints were given of this in a previous volume on\nIsaiah, chapters xl.-lxvi., which are evidently a composite work.\nAmong the books now before us, the same fact has long been clear\nin the case of Obadiah and Zechariah, and also since Ewald's time\nwith regard to Micah. But Duhm's _Theology of the Prophets_, which\nappeared in 1875, suggested interpolations in Amos. Wellhausen (in\n1873) and Stade (from 1883 onwards) carried the discussion further\nboth on those, and others, of the Twelve; while a recent work by\nAndr\u00e9e on Haggai proves that many similar questions may still be\nraised and have to be debated. The general fact must be admitted\nthat hardly one book has escaped later additions--additions of an\nentirely justifiable nature, which supplement the point of view of\na single prophet with the richer experience or the riper hopes of a\nlater day, and thus afford to ourselves a more catholic presentment\nof the doctrines of prophecy and the Divine purposes for mankind.\nThis general fact, I say, must be admitted. But the questions of\ndetail are still in process of solution. It is obvious that settled\nresults can be reached (as to some extent they have been already\nreached in the criticism of the Pentateuch) only after years of\nresearch and debate by all schools of critics. Meantime it is the\nduty of each of us to offer his own conclusions, with regard to every\nseparate passage, on the understanding that, however final they may\nat present seem to him, the end is not yet. In previous criticism\nthe defects, of which work in the same field has made me aware, are\nfour: 1. A too rigid belief in the exact parallelism and symmetry of\nthe prophetic style, which I feel has led, for instance, Wellhausen,\nto whom we otherwise owe so much on the Twelve Prophets, into many\nunnecessary emendations of the text, or, where some amendment is\nnecessary, to absolutely unprovable changes. 2. In passages between\nwhich no connection exists, the forgetfulness of the principle\nthat this fact may often be explained as justly by the hypothesis\nof the omission of some words, as by the favourite theory of the\nlater intrusion of portions of the extant text. 3. Forgetfulness of\nthe possibility, which in some cases amounts almost to certainty,\nof the incorporation, among the authentic words of a prophet, of\npassages of earlier as well as of later date. And, 4. depreciation\nof the spiritual insight and foresight of pre-exilic writers. These,\nI am persuaded, are defects in previous criticism of the prophets.\nProbably my own criticism will reveal many more. In the beginnings\nof such analysis as we are engaged on, we must be prepared for\nnot a little arbitrariness and want of proportion; these are often\nnecessary for insight and fresh points of view, but they are as\neasily eliminated by the progress of discussion.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAll criticism, however, is preliminary to the real work which the\nimmortal prophets demand from scholars and preachers in our age. In\na review of a previous volume, I was blamed for applying a prophecy\nof Isaiah to a problem of our own day. This was called \"prostituting\nprophecy.\" _The_ prostitution of the prophets is their confinement to\nacademic uses. One cannot conceive an ending, at once more pathetic\nand more ridiculous, to those great streams of living water, than to\nallow them to run out in the sands of criticism and exegesis, however\ngolden these sands may be. The prophets spoke for a practical purpose;\nthey aimed at the hearts of men; and everything that scholarship can\ndo for their writings has surely for its final aim the illustration\nof their witness to the ways of God with men, and its application to\nliving questions and duties and hopes. Besides, therefore, seeking to\ntell the story of that wonderful stage in the history of the human\nspirit--surely next in wonder to the story of Christ Himself--I have\nnot feared at every suitable point to apply its truths to our lives\nto-day. The civilisation in which prophecy flourished was in its\nessentials marvellously like our own. To mark only one point, the rise\nof prophecy in Israel came fast upon the passage of the nation from an\nagricultural to a commercial basis of society, and upon the appearance\nof the very thing which gives its name to civilisation--city-life,\nwith its unchanging sins, problems and ideals.\n\nA recent Dutch critic, whose exact scholarship is known to all\nreaders of Stade's _Journal of Old Testament Science_, has said of\nAmos and Hosea: \"These prophecies have a word of God, as for all\ntimes, so also especially for our own. Before all it is relevant to\n'the social question' of our day, to the relation of religion and\nmorality.... Often it has been hard for me to refrain from expressly\npointing out the agreement between Then and To-day.\"[1] This\nfeeling will be shared by all students of prophecy whose minds and\nconsciences are quick; and I welcome the liberal plan of the series\nin which this volume appears, because, while giving room for the\nadequate discussion of critical and historical questions, its chief\ndesign is to show the eternal validity of the Books of the Bible as\nthe Word of God, and their meaning for ourselves to-day.\n\n * * * * *\n\nPrevious works on the Minor Prophets are almost innumerable. Those\nto which I owe most will be found indicated in the footnotes. The\ntranslation has been executed upon the purpose, not to sacrifice the\nliteral meaning or exact emphasis of the original to the frequent\npossibility of greater elegance. It reproduces every word, with\nthe occasional exception of a copula. With some hesitation I have\nretained the traditional spelling of the Divine Name, Jehovah,\ninstead of the more correct Jahve or Yahweh; but where the rhythm\nof certain familiar passages was disturbed by it, I have followed\nthe English versions and written Lord. The reader will keep in mind\nthat a line may be destroyed by substituting our pronunciation of\nproper names for the more musical accents of the original. Thus,\nfor instance, we obliterate the music of \"Isra'el\" by making it two\nsyllables and putting the accent on the first: it has three syllables\nwith the accent on the last. We crush Yerushalay\u00ee\u1e3f into Jer\u00fasalem;\nwe shred off Assh\u00fbr into Assyria, and dub Mi\u1e63ra\u00ee\u1e3f Egypt. Hebrew has\ntoo few of the combinations which sound most musical to our ears, to\nafford the suppression of any one of them.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[1] J. J. P. Valeton, jun., _Amos en Hosea_, 1894: quoted by Budde in\nthe _Theologische Literaturzeitung_, September, 1894.\n\n\n\n\n CONTENTS OF VOL. I.\n\n\n PAGE\n\n PREFACE vii\n\n CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 1\n\n _INTRODUCTION_\n\n CHAP.\n\n I. THE BOOK OF THE TWELVE 3\n\n II. THE PROPHET IN EARLY ISRAEL 11\n\n 1. FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TILL SAMUEL.\n 2. FROM SAMUEL TO ELISHA.\n\n III. THE EIGHTH CENTURY IN ISRAEL 31\n\n IV. THE INFLUENCE OF ASSYRIA UPON PROPHECY 44\n\n\n _AMOS_\n\n V. THE BOOK OF AMOS 61\n\n VI. THE MAN AND THE PROPHET 73\n\n 1. THE MAN AND HIS DISCIPLINE\n (i. 1; iii. 3-8; vii. 14, 15).\n 2. THE WORD AND ITS ORIGINS\n (i. 2; iii. 3-8; and _passim_).\n 3. THE PROPHET AND HIS MINISTRY\n (vii.; viii. 1-4).\n\n VII. ATROCITIES AND ATROCITIES 121\n\n AMOS i. 3-ii.\n\n VIII. CIVILISATION AND JUDGMENT 141\n\n AMOS iii.-iv. 3.\n\n IX. THE FALSE PEACE OF RITUAL 156\n\n AMOS iv. 4-vi.\n\n 1. FOR WORSHIP, CHASTISEMENT\n (iv. 4-13).\n 2. FOR WORSHIP, JUSTICE (v.).\n 3. \"AT EASE IN ZION\" (vi.).\n 4. A FRAGMENT FROM THE PLAGUE\n (vi. 9, 10).\n\n X. DOOM OR DISCIPLINE? 181\n\n AMOS viii. 4-ix.\n\n 1. EARTHQUAKE, ECLIPSE AND FAMINE\n (viii. 4-14).\n 2. NEMESIS (ix. 1-6).\n 3. THE VOICES OF ANOTHER DAWN\n (ix. 7-15).\n\n XI. COMMON-SENSE AND THE REIGN OF LAW 196\n\n AMOS iii. 3-8; iv. 6-13; v. 8, 9;\n vi. 12; viii. 8; ix. 5, 6.\n\n\n _HOSEA_\n\n XII. THE BOOK OF HOSEA 211\n\n XIII. THE PROBLEM THAT AMOS LEFT 227\n\n XIV. THE STORY OF THE PRODIGAL WIFE 232\n\n HOSEA i.-iii.\n\n XV. THE THICK NIGHT OF ISRAEL 253\n\n HOSEA iv.-xiv.\n\n XVI. A PEOPLE IN DECAY: I. MORALLY 255\n\n HOSEA iv.-vii. 7.\n\n 1. THE LORD'S QUARREL WITH ISRAEL\n (iv.).\n 2. PRIESTS AND PRINCES FAIL\n (v. 1-14).\n 3. REPENTANCE FAILS\n (v. 15-vii. 2).\n 4. WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES\n (vii. 3-7).\n\n XVII. A PEOPLE IN DECAY: II. POLITICALLY 269\n\n HOSEA vii. 8-x.\n\n 1. THE CONFUSION OF THE NATION\n (vii. 8-viii. 3).\n 2. ARTIFICIAL KINGS AND ARTIFICIAL\n GODS (viii. 4-13).\n 3. THE EFFECTS OF EXILE\n (ix. 1-9).\n 4. \"THE CORRUPTION THAT IS THROUGH\n LUST\" (ix. 10-17).\n 5. ONCE MORE: PUPPET-KINGS AND\n PUPPET-GODS (x.).\n\n XVIII. THE FATHERHOOD AND HUMANITY OF GOD 290\n\n HOSEA xi.\n\n XIX. THE FINAL ARGUMENT 299\n\n HOSEA xii.-xiv. 1.\n\n 1. THE PEOPLE AND THEIR FATHER\n JACOB (xii.).\n 2. THE LAST JUDGMENT\n (xiii.-xiv. 1).\n\n XX. \"I WILL BE AS THE DEW\" 308\n\n HOSEA xiv. 2-10.\n\n XXI. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD 318\n\n HOSEA _passim_.\n\n XXII. REPENTANCE 333\n\n HOSEA _passim_.\n\n XXIII. THE SIN AGAINST LOVE 346\n\n HOSEA i.-iii.; iv. 11 ff.;\n ix. 10 ff.; xi. 8 f.\n\n\n _MICAH_\n\n XXIV. THE BOOK OF MICAH 357\n\n XXV. MICAH THE MORASTHITE 375\n\n MICAH i.\n\n XXVI. THE PROPHET OF THE POOR 386\n\n MICAH ii., iii.\n\n XXVII. ON TIME'S HORIZON 400\n\n MICAH iv. 1-7.\n\n XXVIII. THE KING TO COME 408\n\n MICAH iv. 8-v.\n\n XXIX. THE REASONABLENESS OF TRUE RELIGION 419\n\n MICAH vi. 1-8.\n\n XXX. THE SIN OF THE SCANT MEASURE 426\n\n MICAH vi. 9-vii. 6.\n\n XXXI. OUR MOTHER OF SORROWS 435\n\n MICAH vii. 7-20.\n\n\n INDEX OF PASSAGES AND TEXTS 439\n\n CHRONOLOGY OF THE DOUBLE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL, _c._ 940-639 B.C.\n\n*** _c._ = _circa_: it refers only to the accession of the kings of\nJudah and Israel; the years are exact so far as they concern the\nAssyrian data. A date opposite the mere name of a king signifies the\nyear of his accession.\n\n -------+-------------+-----------------+---------+------------------------------+-----------------------+-----\n | JUDAH. | ISRAEL. | THE | SYRIA, ETC. | ASSYRIA. |\n | | |PROPHETS.| | |\n -------+-------------+-----------------+---------+------------------------------+-----------------------+-----\n 940_c._|Disruption of the Kingdom. | | | |\n |Rehoboam. |Jeroboam I. | | | |\n | |Establishment of | | | |\n | | calf images in | | | |\n | | N. Israel. | | | |\n 923_c._|Abijam. | | | | |\n 920_c._|Asa. | | | | |\n 918_c._| ... |Nadab. | | | |\n 915_c._| ... |Baasha. | | | |\n 891_c._| ... |Elah. | | | |\n 888_c._| ... |Zimri. Omri. | | | |\n 876_c._| ... |Ahab. |} | Revolt of Mesha of Moab: the | |\n 874_c._|Jehoshaphat. | ... |} Elijah.| Moabite Stone (_circa_ 860).| |\n 854 | ... |First contact of |} | Israel and Syria with | Assyria at the Battle | 854\n | | |} | | of \u1e32ar\u1e33ar. |\n 853_c._| ... |Ahaziah. |}} | | |\n 852_c._| ... |Joram. | } | | |\n .... | ... | Invades Moab w. | } | | |\n | | Judah and Edom. | } | | |\n 850 | ... | ... | } ... | }Campaigns in all these 3 yrs| by Shalmaneser II. of |{850\n 849_c._|Jehoram. | ... | } ... | } Assyria against Dadidri or | Hadadezer of Damascus.|{849\n 846 | ... | ... | } ... | }Revolt of Edom from Judah | ... |{846\n 844_c._|Ahaziah. | | } | (2 Kings viii. 20 ff.). | |\n 842_c._|Athaliah. |Jehu. | }Elisha.| ... | Tribute from Jehu. | 842\n ... | ... | ... | } ... | War of Hazael with | Assyria. | ...\n 839 | ... | ... | } ... | War of Hazael with | Assyria. | 839\n 836_c._|Joash. | ... | } ... | }Hazael subdues Gilead (Amos | ... |{836\n 814_c._| ... |Jehoahaz. | } ... | } i. 3); attacks Gath, but is| ... |{814\n | ... | ... | } ... | } bought off from Jerusalem. | |{\n 812 | ... | ... | } ... | ... | Ac. of Ramman-Nirari. | 812\n 806 | ... | ... | } ... | Arpad, campaign against, by | Assyria. | 806\n 803 | ... | ... | } ... | Damascus, under Meri, besieged and taken by Assyria. | 803\n ... | ... | ... | } ... | A year of pestilence. | ... | ...\n 798_c._| ... |Joash. | } | | |\n 797_c._|Amaziah. | | | | |\n 783_c._| ... |Jeroboam II. | ... | ... | Shalmaneser III. | 783\n 778_c._|Uzziah | | | | |\n | (Azariah). | | | | |\n 775 | ... |}Jeroboam | ... | ... | Expedition to |\n | |}re-conquers | | | Cedar Country. | 775\n 773 | ... |}Moab, Gilead, | ... | Damascus, campaign against, | by Assyria. | 773\n 772 | ... |}and part of | ... | Hadrach, campaign against, | by Assyria. | 772\n 765 | ... |}Aram. | ... | A pestilence. | Ac. of Assur-dan-il. | 765\n | | | | Hadrach, campaign against, | by Assyria. |\n 763 |Total eclipse of the sun on June 15th | visible in Syria and at | Nineveh. | 763\n 759 | ... | ... | } ... | A pestilence in Western Asia.| ... | 759\n 755 | ... | ... | } ... | Hadrach suffers attack from | Assyria. | 755\n 754 | ... | ... | } Amos. | Arpad suffers attack from | Assyria. | 754\n 753 | ... | ... | } ... | ... | Ac. of Assur-Nirari. | 753\n 745 | ... | ... | } ... | ... | Accession of |\n | | | } | | Tiglath-Pileser III. | 745\n 743 | ... |Zechariah, son of|} ... | } | | 743\n | |Jeroboam (6 mo.).|} ... | } ... | |\n | |Shallum (1 mo.). |} ... | } Arpad besieged, and after | two or three years |\n | |Menahem. |} Hosea. | } | taken by Assyria. |\n 742 | ... | ... |} ... | } | | 742\n 741 | ... | ... |}} ... | } | | 741\n 740 |\"The yr King | ... |}} | | |\n 736? |Uzziah died.\"| |}} | | |\n |Jotham sole ruler. |}} | | |\n 738 | ... |Menahem is |}} | mentioned as tributary to | Assyria. | 738\n 737_c._| |Pekahiah. |}} | | |\n 736_c._|Ahaz. |Pekah, the | } | | |\n | |Gileadite. | } | [(Isa. vii.).| |\n 735 |Ahaz is attacked both by Pekah | } | and by Rezin of Damascus | ... | 735\n 734 | ... |Captivity of Gil-| } | | etc., by Assyria |\n | | ead, Galilee, | } | | (Isa. viii., ix.). | 734\n 733 | ... | ... | } ... |Damascus besieged and taken by| Assyria. | 733\n 732 |Ahaz pays homage | } | at Damascus to the King of | Assyria. | 732\n 731 | ... | ... | } ... | ... |Tiglath-Pileser becomes| 731\n 730_c._| ... |Hoshea. | } | | King of Babylon under|\n | | | } | | the name of Pul. |\n 727_c._|Hezekiah. | ... | }Isaiah.| ... | Shalmaneser IV. | 727\n 725 | ... |Siege of Samaria | } | | begins. |\n 722 | ... |Fall of Samaria. | } ... | ... | Sargon takes Samaria. | 722\n or 1 | | | } | | | or 1\n 720 | ... | ... |}} ... | Gaza overthrown by Sargon as he marches past Judah | 720\n or 19 | | |}} | and defeats Egypt at Raphia. |or 19\n 715 | ... |Samaria peopled |}} | |by subjugated tribes | 715\n | | |}} | | deported from Assyria.|\n 711 | ... | ... |}} ... | Ashdod taken by | Sargon. | 711\n 709 | ... | ... |}} ... | ... |Sargon takes Babylon | 709\n | | |}} | | from Merodach-Baladan.|\n 705 | ... | ... |}} | ... | Death of Sargon. | 705\n | | |}} | | Ac. of Sennacherib. |\n 704 | ... | ... |}} ... | ... War | with Merodach-Baladan.| 704\n 701 |Invasion of Judah |}} | and of all Syria | by Sennacherib. | 701\n |Deliverance of Jerusalem. |}} | Siege of Ekron. Battle of | |\n | | |} Micah. | Eltekeh. | |\n 695 |Manasseh. | ... |} | | |\n _c._[2]| | | | | |\n 681 | ... | ... | ... | ... | Sennacherib murdered. | 681\n | | | | | Asarhaddon succeeds. |\n 678 | ... | ... | ... | Ph\u0153nicia subdued by | Asarhaddon. | 678\n 676 |Manasseh |tributary to | | | Assyria. | 676\n 671 | ... | ... | ... | Tyre taken by | Asarhaddon on his | 671\n | | | | march to Egypt, and conquest of Memphis. |\n 668 | ... | ... | ... | ... | Assurbanipal. | 668\n 666 |Manasseh |and the | | other Syrian kings | tributary to Assyria. | 666\n 641_c._|Amon. | ... | ... | Tyre assists | Assurbanipal against | 641\n | | | | the Ph\u0153nician Arvad. | |\n 639_c._|Josiah. | | | | |\n -------+-------------+-----------------+---------+------------------------------+-----------------------+-----\n\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[2] This date is very uncertain. It may have been 690, or according\nto some 685.\n\n\n\n\n _INTRODUCTION_\n\n\n\n\n \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b9\u03b2' \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f40\u03c3\u03c4\u1fb6\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd,\n \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f38\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03b2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c5 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n _And of the Twelve Prophets may the bones_\n _Flourish again from their place,_\n _For they comforted Jacob_\n _And redeemed them by the assurance of hope._\n ECCLESIASTICUS xlix. 10.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER I\n\n _THE BOOK OF THE TWELVE_\n\n\nIn the order of our English Bible the Minor Prophets, as they are\nusually called, form the last twelve books of the Old Testament.\nThey are immediately preceded by Daniel, and before him by the three\nMajor Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah (with Lamentations) and Ezekiel. Why\nall sixteen were thus gathered at the end of the other sacred books,\nwe do not know. Perhaps, because it was held fitting that prophecy\nshould occupy the last outposts of the Old Testament towards the New.\n\nIn the Hebrew Bible, however, the order differs, and is much more\nsignificant. The Prophets[3] form the second division of the\nthreefold Canon: Law, Prophets and Writings; and Daniel is not among\nthem. The Minor follow immediately after Ezekiel. Moreover, they are\nnot twelve books, but one. They are gathered under the common title\n_Book of the Twelve_;[4] and although each of them has the usual\ncolophon detailing the number of its own verses, there is also\none colophon for all the twelve, placed at the end of Malachi and\nreckoning the sum of their verses from the first of Hosea onwards.\nThis unity, which there is reason to suppose was given to them before\ntheir reception into the Canon,[5] they have never since lost.\nHowever much their place has changed in the order of the books of\nthe Old Testament, however much their own internal arrangement has\ndiffered, the Twelve have always stood together. There has been every\ntemptation to scatter them because of their various dates. Yet they\nnever have been scattered; and in spite of the fact that they have\nnot preserved their common title in any Bible outside the Hebrew,\nthat title has lived on in literature and common talk. Thus the Greek\ncanon omits it; but Greek Jews and Christians always counted the\nbooks as one volume,[6] calling them \"The Twelve Prophets,\" or \"The\nTwelve-Prophet\" Book.[7]. It was the Latins who designated them \"The\nMinor Prophets\": \"on account of their brevity as compared with those\nwho are called the Major because of their ampler volumes.\"[8] And\nthis name has passed into most modern languages,[9] including our\nown. But surely it is better to revert to the original, canonical\nand unambiguous title of \"The Twelve.\"\n\nThe collection and arrangement of \"The Twelve\" are matters of\nobscurity, from which, however, three or four facts emerge that are\ntolerably certain. The inseparableness of the books is a proof of the\nancient date of their union. They must have been put together before\nthey were received into the Canon. The Canon of the Prophets--Joshua\nto Second Kings and Isaiah to Malachi--was closed by 200 B.C. at\nthe latest, and perhaps as early as 250; but if we have (as seems\nprobable) portions of \"The Twelve,\"[10] which must be assigned to\na little later than 300, this may be held to prove that the whole\ncollection cannot have long preceded the fixing of the Canon of the\nProphets. On the other hand, the fact that these latest pieces have\nnot been placed under a title of their own, but are attached to the\nBook of Zechariah, is pretty sufficient evidence that they were added\nafter the collection and fixture of twelve books--a round number\nwhich there would be every disposition not to disturb. That would\ngive us for the date of the first edition (so to speak) of our Twelve\nsome year before 300; and for the date of the second edition some\nyear towards 250. This is a question, however, which may be reserved\nfor final decision after we have examined the date of the separate\nbooks, and especially of Joel and the second half of Zechariah. That\nthere was a previous collection, as early as the Exile, of the books\nwritten before then, may be regarded as more than probable. But we\nhave no means of fixing its exact limits. Why the Twelve were all\nultimately put together is reasonably suggested by Jewish writers.\nThey are small, and, as separate rolls, might have been lost.[11] It\nis possible that the desire of the round number twelve is responsible\nfor the admission of Jonah, a book very different in form from all\nthe others; just as we have hinted that the fact of there being\nalready twelve may account for the attachment of the late fragments\nto the Book of Zechariah. But all this is only to guess, where we\nhave no means of certain knowledge.\n\n\"The Book of the Twelve\" has not always held the place which it now\noccupies in the Hebrew Canon, at the end of the Prophets. The rabbis\ntaught that Hosea, but for the comparative smallness of his prophecy,\nshould have stood first of all the writing prophets, of whom they\nregarded him as the oldest.[12] And doubtless it was for the same\nchronological reasons, that early Christian catalogues of the\nScriptures, and various editions of the Septuagint, placed the whole\nof \"The Twelve\" in front of Isaiah.[13]\n\nThe internal arrangement of \"The Twelve\" in our English Bible is the\nsame as that of the Hebrew Canon, and was probably determined by what\nthe compilers thought to be the respective ages of the books. Thus,\nfirst we have six, all supposed to be of the earlier Assyrian period,\nbefore 700--Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah; then three\nfrom the late Assyrian and the Babylonian periods--Nahum, Habbakuk\nand Zephaniah; and then three from the Persian period after the\nExile--Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. The Septuagint have altered the\norder of the first six, arranging Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel and Obadiah\naccording to their size, and setting Jonah after them, probably because\nof his different form. The remaining six are left as in the Hebrew.\n\nRecent criticism, however, has made it clear that the Biblical order\nof \"The Twelve Prophets\" is no more than a very rough approximation\nto the order of their real dates; and, as it is obviously best for us\nto follow in their historical succession prophecies, which illustrate\nthe whole history of prophecy from its rise with Amos to its fall\nwith Malachi and his successors, I propose to do this. Detailed\nproofs of the separate dates must be left to each book. All that is\nneedful here is a general statement of the order.\n\nOf the first six prophets the dates of Amos, Hosea, and Micah (but\nof the latter's book in part only) are certain. The Jews have been\nable to defend Hosea's priority only on fanciful grounds.[14] Whether\nor not he quotes from Amos, his historical allusions are more\nrecent. With the exception of a few fragments incorporated by later\nauthors, the Book of Amos is thus the earliest example of prophetic\nliterature, and we take it first. The date we shall see is about 755.\nHosea begins five or ten years later, and Micah just before 722. The\nthree are in every respect--originality, comprehensiveness, influence\nupon other prophets--the greatest of our Twelve, and will therefore\nbe treated with most detail, occupying the whole of the first volume.\n\nThe rest of the first six are Obadiah, Joel and Jonah. But the Book\nof Obadiah, although it opens with an early oracle against Edom, is in\nits present form from after the Exile. The Book of Joel is of uncertain\ndate, but, as we shall see, the great probability is that it is late;\nand the Book of Jonah belongs to a form of literature so different from\nthe others that we may, most conveniently, treat of it last.\n\nThis leaves us to follow Micah, at the end of the eighth century,\nwith the group Zephaniah, Nahum and Habakkuk from the second half\nof the seventh century; and finally to take in their order the\npost-exilic Haggai, Zechariah i.-ix., Malachi, and the other writings\nwhich we feel obliged to place about or even after that date.\n\nOne other word is needful. This assignment of the various books to\ndifferent dates is not to be held as implying that the whole of a\nbook belongs to such a date or to the author whose name it bears. We\nshall find that hands have been busy with the texts of the books long\nafter the authors of these must have passed away; that besides early\nfragments incorporated by later writers, prophets of Israel's new dawn\nmitigated the judgments and lightened the gloom of the watchmen of her\nnight; that here and there are passages which are evidently intrusions,\nboth because they interrupt the argument and because they reflect a\nmuch later historical environment than their context. This, of course,\nwill require discussion in each case, and such discussion will be\ngiven. The text will be subjected to an independent examination. Some\npassages hitherto questioned we may find to be unjustly so; others\nnot hitherto questioned we may see reason to suspect. But in any case\nwe shall keep in mind, that the results of an independent inquiry are\nuncertain; and that in this new criticism of the prophets, which is\ncomparatively recent, we cannot hope to arrive for some time at so\ngeneral a consensus, as is being rapidly reached in the far older and\nmore elaborated criticism of the Pentateuch.[15]\n\n * * * * *\n\nSuch is the extent and order of the journey which lies before\nus. If it is not to the very summits of Israel's outlook that we\nclimb--Isaiah, Jeremiah and the great Prophet of the Exile--we are\nyet to traverse the range of prophecy from beginning to end. We\nstart with its first abrupt elevations in Amos. We are carried by\nthe side of Isaiah and Jeremiah, yet at a lower altitude, on to the\nExile. With the returned Israel we pursue an almost immediate rise to\nvision, and then by Malachi and others are conveyed down dwindling\nslopes to the very end. Beyond the land is flat. Though Psalms are\nsung and brave deeds done, and faith is strong and bright, there is\nno height of outlook; _there is no more any prophet_[16] in Israel.\n\nBut our \"Twelve\" do more than thus carry us from beginning to end of\nthe Prophetic Period. Of second rank as are most of the heights of\nthis mountain range, they yet bring forth and speed on their way not\na few of the streams of living water which have nourished later ages,\nand are flowing to-day. Impetuous cataracts of righteousness--_let\nit roll on like water, and justice as an everlasting stream_; the\nirrepressible love of God to sinful men; the perseverance and\npursuits of His grace; His mercies that follow the exile and the\noutcast; His truth that goes forth richly upon the heathen; the\nhope of the Saviour of mankind; the outpouring of the Spirit;\ncounsels of patience; impulses of tenderness and of healing; melodies\ninnumerable,--all sprang from these lower hills of prophecy, and\nsprang so strongly that the world hears and feels them still.\n\nAnd from the heights of our present pilgrimage there are also clear\nthose great visions of the Stars and the Dawn, of the Sea and the\nStorm, concerning which it is true, that as long as men live they\nshall seek out the places whence they can be seen, and thank God for\nHis prophets.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[3] Including, of course, the historical books, Joshua to 2 Kings,\nwhich were known as \"the Former Prophets\"; while what we call the\nprophets Isaiah to Malachi were known as \"the Latter.\"\n\n[4] \u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 \u05ea\u05e8\u05d9 \u05e1\u05e4\u05e8, the Aramaic form of the Hebrew \u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e9\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd, which appears\nwith the other in the colophon to the book. A later contraction is\n\u05ea\u05e8\u05d9\u05e1\u05e8. This is the form transliterated in Epiphanius: \u03b4\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1.\n\n[5] See Ryle, _Canon of the O.T._, p. 105.\n\n[6] So Josephus, _Contra Apion_, i. 8 (_circa_ 90 A.D.), reckons the\nprophetical books as thirteen, of which the Minor Prophets could only\nhave been counted as one--whatever the other twelve may have been.\nMelito of Sardis (_c._ 170), quoted by Eusebius (_Hist. Eccl._, iv.\n26), speaks of \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03ce\u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3. To Origen (_c._ 250: apud\nIbid., vi. 25) they could only have been one out of the twenty-two he\ngives for the O.T. Cf. Jerome (_Prolog. Galeatus_), \"Liber duodecim\nProphetarum.\"\n\n[7] \u039f\u1f31 \u0394\u03ce\u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9: Jesus son of Sirach xlix. 10; \u03a4\u1f78\n\u03b4\u03c9\u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1-\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n[8] Augustine, _De Civ. Dei_, xviii. 29: cf. Jerome, _Proem. in Esaiam_.\n\n[9] The German usage generally preserves the numeral, \"Die zw\u00f6lf\nkleinen Propheten.\"\n\n[10] See Vol. II. on Zech. ix. ff.\n\n[11] _Talmud_: Baba Bathra, 14_a_: cf. Rashi's Commentary.\n\n[12] _Talmud_, _ibid._\n\n[13] So the Codices Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, but not Cod. Sin. So\nalso Cyril of Jerusalem (\u2020 386), Athanasius (365), Gregory Naz. (\u2020\n390), and the spurious Canon of the Council of Laodicea (_c._ 400)\nand Epiphanius (403). See Ryle, _Canon of the O.T._, 215 ff.\n\n[14] By a forced interpretation of the phrase in chap. i. 2, _When the\nLord spake at the first by Hosea_ (R.V.), _Talmud_: Baba Bathra, 14_a_.\n\n[15] For further considerations on this point see pp. 142, 194, 202\nff., 223 ff., 308, etc.\n\n[16] Psalm lxxiv. 9.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER II\n\n _THE PROPHET IN EARLY ISRAEL_\n\n\nOur \"Twelve Prophets\" will carry us, as we have seen, across the\nwhole extent of the Prophetical period--the period when prophecy\nbecame literature, assuming the form and rising to the intensity of\nan imperishable influence on the world. The earliest of the Twelve,\nAmos and Hosea, were the inaugurators of this period. They were not\nonly the first (so far as we know) to commit prophecy to writing, but\nwe find in them the germs of all its subsequent development. Yet Amos\nand Hosea were not unfathered. Behind them lay an older dispensation,\nand their own was partly a product of this, and partly a revolt\nagainst it. Amos says of himself: _The Lord hath spoken, who can but\nprophesy?_--but again: _No prophet I, nor prophet's son_! Who were\nthose earlier prophets, whose office Amos assumed while repudiating\ntheir spirit--whose name he abjured, yet could not escape from it? And,\nwhile we are about the matter, what do we mean by \"prophet\" in general?\n\nIn vulgar use the name \"prophet\" has degenerated to the meaning of\n\"one who foretells the future.\" Of this meaning it is, perhaps, the\nfirst duty of every student of prophecy earnestly and stubbornly\nto rid himself. In its native Greek tongue \"prophet\" meant not\n\"one who speaks before,\" but \"one who speaks for, or on behalf of,\nanother.\" At the Delphic oracle \"The Proph\u0113t\u0113s\" was the title of\nthe official, who received the utterances of the frenzied Pythoness\nand expounded them to the people;[17] but Plato says that this is a\nmisuse of the word, and that the true prophet is the inspired person\nhimself, he who is in communication with the Deity and who speaks\ndirectly for the Deity.[18] So Tiresias, the seer, is called by\nPindar the \"prophet\" or \"interpreter of Zeus,\"[19] and Plato even\nstyles poets \"the prophets of the Muses.\"[20] It is in this sense\nthat we must think of the \"prophet\" of the Old Testament. He is a\nspeaker for God. The sharer of God's counsels, as Amos calls him,\nhe becomes the bearer and preacher of God's Word. Prediction of the\nfuture is only a part, and often a subordinate and accidental part,\nof an office whose full function is to declare the character and the\nwill of God. But the prophet does this in no systematic or abstract\nform. He brings his revelation point by point, and in connection\nwith some occasion in the history of his people, or some phase of\ntheir character. He is not a philosopher nor a theologian with a\nsystem of doctrine (at least before Ezekiel), but the messenger and\nherald of God at some crisis in the life or conduct of His people.\nHis message is never out of touch with events. These form either\nthe subject-matter or the proof or the execution of every oracle he\nutters. It is, therefore, God not merely as Truth, but far more as\nProvidence, whom the prophet reveals. And although that Providence\nincludes the full destiny of Israel and mankind, the prophet brings\nthe news of it, for the most part, piece by piece, with reference\nto some present sin or duty, or some impending crisis or calamity.\nYet he does all this, not merely because the word needed for the\nday has been committed to him by itself, and as if he were only its\nmechanical vehicle; but because he has come under the overwhelming\nconviction of God's presence and of His character, a conviction often\nso strong that God's word breaks through him and God speaks in the\nfirst person to the people.\n\n\n 1. FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TILL SAMUEL.\n\nThere was no ancient people but believed in the power of certain\npersonages to consult the Deity and to reveal His will. Every man could\nsacrifice; but not every man could render in return the oracle of God.\nThis pertained to select individuals or orders. So the prophet seems\nto have been an older specialist than the priest, though in every tribe\nhe frequently combined the latter's functions with his own.[21]\n\nThe matters on which ancient man consulted God were as wide as life.\nBut naturally at first, in a rude state of society and at a low stage\nof mental development, it was in regard to the material defence\nand necessities of life, the bare law and order, that men almost\nexclusively sought the Divine will. And the whole history of prophecy\nis just the effort to substitute for these elementary provisions a\nmore personal standard of the moral law, and more spiritual ideals of\nthe Divine Grace.\n\nBy the Semitic race--to which we may now confine ourselves, since\nIsrael belonged to it--Deity was worshipped, in the main, as the god\nof a tribe. Every Semitic tribe had its own god; it would appear\nthat there was no god without a tribe:[22] the traces of belief in\na supreme and abstract Deity are few and ineffectual. The tribe\nwas the medium by which the god made himself known, and became an\neffective power on earth: the god was the patron of the tribe, the\nsupreme magistrate and the leader in war. The piety he demanded was\nlittle more than loyalty to ritual; the morality he enforced was\nonly a matter of police. He took no cognisance of the character or\ninner thoughts of the individual. But the tribe believed him to\nstand in very close connection with all the practical interests of\ntheir common life. They asked of him the detection of criminals, the\ndiscovery of lost property, the settlement of civil suits, sometimes\nwhen the crops should be sown, and always when war should be waged\nand by what tactics.\n\nThe means by which the prophet consulted the Deity on these subjects\nwere for the most part primitive and rude. They may be summed up\nunder two kinds: Visions either through falling into ecstasy or by\ndreaming in sleep, and Signs or Omens. Both kinds are instanced in\nBalaam.[23] Of the signs some were natural, like the whisper of\ntrees, the flight of birds, the passage of clouds, the movements of\nstars. Others were artificial, like the casting or drawing of lots.\nOthers were between these, like the shape assumed by the entrails of\nthe sacrificed animals when thrown on the ground. Again, the prophet\nwas often obliged to do something wonderful in the people's sight,\nin order to convince them of his authority. In Biblical language he\nhad to work a miracle or give a sign. One instance throws a flood of\nlight on this habitual expectancy of the Semitic mind. There was once\nan Arab chief, who wished to consult a distant soothsayer as to the\nguilt of a daughter. But before he would trust the seer to give him\nthe right answer to such a question, he made him discover a grain\nof corn which he had concealed about his horse.[24] He required the\nphysical sign before he would accept the moral judgment.\n\nNow, to us the crudeness of the means employed, the opportunities\nof fraud, the inadequacy of the tests for spiritual ends, are very\nobvious. But do not let us, therefore, miss the numerous moral\nopportunities which lay before the prophet even at that early\nstage of his evolution. He was trusted to speak in the name of\nDeity. Through him men believed in God and in the possibility of a\nrevelation. They sought from him the discrimination of evil from\ngood. The highest possibilities of social ministry lay open to him:\nthe tribal existence often hung on his word for peace or war; he\nwas the mouth of justice, the rebuke of evil, the champion of the\nwronged. Where such opportunities were present, can we imagine the\nSpirit of God to have been absent--the Spirit Who seeks men more than\nthey seek Him, and as He condescends to use their poor language for\nreligion must also have stooped to the picture language, to the rude\ninstruments, symbols and sacraments, of their early faith?\n\nIn an office of such mingled possibilities everything depended--as\nwe shall find it depend to the very end of prophecy--on the moral\ninsight and character of the prophet himself, on his conception\nof God and whether he was so true to this as to overcome his\nprofessional temptations to fraud and avarice, malice towards\nindividuals, subservience to the powerful, or, worst snares of all,\nthe slothfulness and insincerity of routine. We see this moral issue\nput very clearly in such a story as that of Balaam, or in such a\ncareer as that of Mohammed.\n\nSo much for the Semitic soothsayer in general. Now let us turn to\nIsrael.\n\nAmong the Hebrews the _man of God_,[25] to use his widest designation,\nis at first called _Seer_,[26] or _Gazer_,[27] the word which Balaam\nuses of himself. In consulting the Divine will he employs the same\nexternal means, he offers the people for their evidence the same signs,\nas do the seers or soothsayers of other Semitic tribes. He gains\ninfluence by the miracles, _the wonderful things_, which he does.[28]\nMoses himself is represented after this fashion. He meets the magicians\nof Egypt on their own level. His use of _rods_; the holding up of\nhis hands that Israel may prevail against Amaleq; Joshua's casting\nof lots to discover a criminal; Samuel's dream in the sanctuary; his\ndiscovery for a fee of the lost asses of Saul; David and the images\nin his house, the ephod he consulted; the sign to go to battle _what\ntime thou hearest the sound of a going in the tops of the mulberry\ntrees_; Solomon's inducement of dreams by sleeping in the sanctuary at\nGibeah,--these are a few of the many proofs, that early prophecy in\nIsrael employed not only the methods but even much of the furniture of\nthe kindred Semitic religions. But then those tools and methods were at\nthe same time accompanied by the noble opportunities of the prophetic\noffice to which I have just alluded--opportunities of religious and\nsocial ministry--and, still more, these opportunities were at the\ndisposal of moral influences which, it is a matter of history, were not\nfound in any other Semitic religion than Israel's. However you will\nexplain it, that Divine Spirit, which we have felt unable to conceive\nas absent from any Semitic prophet who truly sought after God, that\nLight which lighteth every man who cometh into the world, was present\nto an unparalleled degree with the early prophets of Israel. He came to\nindividuals, and to the nation as a whole, in events and in influences\nwhich may be summed up as the impression of the character of their\nnational God, Jehovah: to use Biblical language, as _Jehovah's spirit_\nand _power_. It is true that in many ways the Jehovah of early Israel\nreminds us of other Semitic deities. Like some of them He appears\nwith thunder and lightning; like all of them He is the God of one\ntribe who are His peculiar people. He bears the same titles--Melek,\nAdon, Baal (_King_, _Lord_, _Possessor_). He is propitiated by the\nsame offerings. To choose one striking instance, captives and spoil\nof war are sacrificed to Him with the same relentlessness, and by a\nprocess which has even the same names given to it, as in the votive\ninscriptions of Israel's heathen neighbours.[29] Yet, notwithstanding\nall these elements, the religion of Jehovah from the very first\nevinced, by the confession of all critics, an ethical force shared by\nno other Semitic creed. From the first there was in it the promise and\nthe potency of that sublime monotheism, which in the period of our\n\"Twelve\" it afterwards reached.[30] Its earliest effects of course\nwere chiefly political: it welded the twelve tribes into the unity\nof a nation; it preserved them as one amid the many temptations to\nscatter along those divergent lines of culture and of faith, which the\ngeography of their country placed so attractively before them.[31] It\ntaught them to prefer religious loyalty to material advantage, and so\ninspired them with high motives for self-sacrifice and every other\nduty of patriotism. But it did even better than thus teach them to\nbear one another's burdens. It inspired them to care for one another's\nsins. The last chapters of the Book of Judges prove how strong a\nnational conscience there was in early Israel. Even then Israel was\na moral, as well as a political, unity. Gradually there grew up, but\nstill unwritten, a body of Torah, or revealed law, which, though its\nframework was the common custom of the Semitic race, was inspired by\nideals of humanity and justice not elsewhere in that race discernible\nby us.\n\nWhen we analyse this ethical distinction of early Israel, this\nindubitable progress which the nation were making while the rest\nof their world was morally stagnant, we find it to be due to their\nimpressions of the character of their God. This character did not\naffect them as Righteousness only. At first it was even a more\nwonderful Grace. Jehovah had chosen them when they were no people,\nhad redeemed them from servitude, had brought them to their land; had\nborne with their stubbornness, and had forgiven their infidelities.\nSuch a Character was partly manifest in the great events of\ntheir history, and partly communicated itself to their finest\npersonalities--as the Spirit of God does communicate with the spirit\nof man made in His image. Those personalities were the early prophets\nfrom Moses to Samuel. They inspired the nation to believe in God's\npurposes for itself; they rallied it to war for the common faith, and\nwar was then the pitch of self-sacrifice; they gave justice to it in\nGod's name, and rebuked its sinfulness without sparing. Criticism has\nproved that we do not know nearly so much about those first prophets,\nas perhaps we thought we did. But under their God they made Israel.\nOut of their work grew the monotheism of their successors, whom we\nare now to study, and later the Christianity of the New Testament.\nFor myself I cannot but believe, that in the influence of Jehovah\nwhich Israel owned in those early times, there was the authentic\nrevelation of a real Being.\n\n\n 2. FROM SAMUEL TO ELISHA.\n\nOf the oldest order of Hebrew prophecy, Samuel was the last\nrepresentative. Till his time, we are told, the prophet in Israel was\nknown as the Seer,[32] but now, with other tempers and other habits,\na new order appears, whose name--and that means to a certain extent\ntheir spirit--is to displace the older name and the older spirit.\n\nWhen Samuel anointed Saul he bade him, for a sign that he was chosen\nof the Lord, go forth to meet _a company of prophets_--Nebi'\u00eem, the\nsingular is Nabi'--coming down from the high place or sanctuary with\nviols, drums and pipes, and _prophesying_. _There_, he added, _the\nspirit of Jehovah shall come upon thee, and thou shalt prophesy with\nthem, and shalt be turned into another man_. So it happened; and the\npeople _said one to another, What is this that is come to the son of\nKish? Is Saul also among the prophets?_[33] Another story, probably\nfrom another source, tells us that later, when Saul sent troops\nof messengers to the sanctuary at Ramah to take David, they saw\n_the company of prophets prophesying and Samuel standing appointed\nover them, and the spirit of God fell_ upon one after another of\nthe troops; as upon Saul himself when he followed them up. _And he\nstripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like\nmanner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore\nthey say, Is Saul also among the prophets?_[34]\n\nAll this is very different from the habits of the Seer, who had\nhitherto represented prophecy. He was solitary, but these went\nabout in bands. They were filled with an infectious enthusiasm, by\nwhich they excited each other and all sensitive persons whom they\ntouched. They stirred up this enthusiasm by singing, playing upon\ninstruments, and dancing: its results were frenzy, the tearing of\ntheir clothes, and prostration. The same phenomena have appeared\nin every religion--in Paganism often, and several times within\nChristianity. They may be watched to-day among the dervishes of\nIslam, who by singing (as one has seen them in Cairo), by swaying\nof their bodies, by repeating the Divine Name, and dwelling on the\nlove and ineffable power of God, work themselves into an excitement\nwhich ends in prostration and often in insensibility.[35] The whole\nprocess is due to an overpowering sense of the Deity--crude and\nunintelligent if you will, but sincere and authentic--which seems\nto haunt the early stages of all religions, and to linger to the\nend with the stagnant and unprogressive. The appearance of this\nprophecy in Israel has given rise to a controversy as to whether it\nwas purely a native product, or was induced by infection from the\nCanaanite tribes around. Such questions are of little interest in\nface of these facts: that the ecstasy sprang up in Israel at a time\nwhen the spirit of the people was stirred against the Philistines,\nand patriotism and religion were equally excited; that it is\nrepresented as due to the Spirit of Jehovah; and that the last of\nthe old order of Jehovah's prophets recognised its harmony with his\nown dispensation, presided over it, and gave Israel's first king\nas one of his signs, that he should come under its power. These\nthings being so, it is surprising that a recent critic[36] should\nhave seen in the dancing prophets nothing but eccentrics into whose\ncompany it was shame for so good a man as Saul to fall. He reaches\nthis conclusion only by supposing that the reflexive verb used for\ntheir _prophesying_--_hithnabb\u0113'_--had at this time that equivalence\nto mere madness to which it was reduced by the excesses of later\ngenerations of prophets. With Samuel we feel that the word had no\nreproach: the Nebi'\u00eem were recognised by him as standing in the\nprophetical succession. They sprang up in sympathy with a national\nmovement. The king who joined himself to them was the same who\nsternly banished from Israel all the baser forms of soothsaying and\ntraffic with the dead. But, indeed, we need no other proof than\nthis: the name Nebi'\u00eem so establishes itself in the popular regard\nthat it displaces the older names of Seer and Gazer, and becomes the\nclassical term for the whole body of prophets from Moses to Malachi.\n\nThere was one very remarkable change effected by this new order of\nprophets, probably the very greatest relief which prophecy experienced\nin the course of its evolution. This was separation from the ritual\nand from the implements of soothsaying. Samuel had been both priest\nand prophet. But after him the names and the duties were specialised,\nthough the specialising was incomplete. While the new Nebi'\u00eem remained\nin connection with the ancient centres of religion, they do not appear\nto have exercised any part of the ritual. The priests, on the other\nhand, did not confine themselves to sacrifice and other forms of public\nworship, but exercised many of the so-called prophetic functions. They\nalso, as Hosea tells us, were expected to give T\u00f4r\u00f4th--revelations\nof the Divine will on points of conduct and order. There remained\nwith them the ancient forms of oracle--the Ephod, or plated image,\nthe Teraphim, the lot, and the Urim and Thummim,[37] all of these\napparently still regarded as indispensable elements of religion.[38]\nFrom such rude forms of ascertaining the Divine Will, prophecy in its\nnew order was absolutely free. And it was free of the ritual of the\nsanctuaries. As has been justly remarked, the ritual of Israel always\nremained a peril to the people, the peril of relapsing into Paganism.\nNot only did it materialise faith and engross affections in the\nworshipper which were meant for moral objects, but very many of its\nforms were actually the same as those of the other Semitic religions,\nand it tempted its devotees to the confusion of their God with the gods\nof the heathen. Prophecy was now wholly independent of it, and we may\nsee in such independence the possibility of all the subsequent career\nof prophecy along moral and spiritual lines. Amos absolutely condemns\nthe ritual, and Hosea brings the message from God, _I will have mercy\nand not sacrifice_. This is the distinctive glory of prophecy in that\nera in which we are to study it. But do not let us forget that it\nbecame possible through the ecstatic Nebi'\u00eem of Samuel's time, and\nthrough their separation from the national ritual and the material\nforms of soothsaying. It is the way of Providence to prepare for the\nrevelation of great moral truths, by the enfranchisement, sometimes\ncenturies before, of an order or a nation of men from political or\nprofessional interests which would have rendered it impossible for\ntheir descendants to appreciate those truths without prejudice or\ncompromise.\n\nWe may conceive then of these Nebi'\u00eem, these prophets, as enthusiasts\nfor Jehovah and for Israel. For Jehovah--if to-day we see men cast\nby the adoration of the despot-deity of Islam into transports so\nexcessive that they lose all consciousness of earthly things and fall\ninto a trance, can we not imagine a like effect produced on the same\nsensitive natures of the East by the contemplation of such a God as\nJehovah, so mighty in earth and heaven, so faithful to His people, so\nfull of grace? Was not such an ecstasy of worship most likely to be\nborn of the individual's ardent devotion in the hour of the nation's\ndespair?[39] Of course there would be swept up by such a movement all\nthe more volatile and unbalanced minds of the day--as these always\nhave been swept up by any powerful religious excitement--but that is\nnot to discredit the sincerity of the main volume of the feeling nor\nits authenticity as a work of the Spirit of God, as the impression of\nthe character and power of Jehovah.\n\nBut these ecstatics were also enthusiasts for Israel; and this saved\nthe movement from morbidness. They worshipped God neither out of\nsheer physical sympathy with nature, like the Ph\u0153nician devotees of\nAdonis or the Greek Bacchantes; nor out of terror at the approaching\nend of all things, like some of the ecstatic sects of the Middle\nAges; nor out of a selfish passion for their own salvation, like so\nmany a modern Christian fanatic; but in sympathy with their nation's\naspirations for freedom and her whole political life. They were\nenthusiasts for their people. The ecstatic prophet was not confined\nto his body nor to nature for the impulses of Deity. Israel was his\nbody, his atmosphere, his universe. Through it all he felt the thrill\nof Deity. Confine religion to the personal, it grows rancid, morbid.\nWed it to patriotism, it lives in the open air and its blood is pure.\nSo in days of national danger the Nebi'\u00eem would be inspired like Saul\nto battle for their country's freedom; in more settled times they\nwould be lifted to the responsibilities of educating the people,\ncounselling the governors, and preserving the national traditions.\nThis is what actually took place. After the critical period of Saul's\ntime has passed, the prophets still remain enthusiasts; but they are\nenthusiasts for affairs. They counsel and they rebuke David.[40] They\nwarn Rehoboam, and they excite Northern Israel to revolt.[41] They\noverthrow and they set up dynasties.[42] They offer the king advice\non campaigns.[43] Like Elijah, they take up against the throne the\ncause of the oppressed;[44] like Elisha, they stand by the throne\nits most trusted counsellors in peace and war.[45] That all this is\nno new order of prophecy in Israel, but the developed form of the\necstasy of Samuel's day, is plain from the continuance of the name\nNebi'\u00eem and from these two facts besides: that the ecstasy survives\nand that the prophets still live in communities. The greatest figures\nof the period, Elijah and Elisha, have upon them _the hand of the\nLord_, as the influence is now called: Elijah when he runs before\nAhab's chariot across Esdraelon, Elisha when by music he induces\nupon himself the prophetic mood.[46] Another ecstatic figure is\nthe prophet who was sent to anoint Jehu; he swept in and he swept\nout again, and the soldiers called him _that mad fellow_.[47] But\nthe roving bands had settled down into more or less stationary\ncommunities, who partly lived by agriculture and partly by the alms\nof the people or the endowments of the crown.[48] Their centres were\neither the centres of national worship, like Bethel and Gilgal, or\nthe centres of government, like Samaria, where the dynasty of Omri\nsupported prophets both of Baal and of Jehovah.[49] They were called\nprophets, but also _sons of the prophets_, the latter name not\nbecause their office was hereditary, but by the Oriental fashion of\ndesignating every member of a guild as the son of the guild. In many\ncases the son may have succeeded his father; but the ranks could be\nrecruited from outside, as we see in the case of the young farmer\nElisha, whom Elijah anointed at the plough. They probably all wore\nthe mantle which is distinctive of some of them, the mantle of hair,\nor skin of a beast.[50]\n\nThe risks of degeneration, to which this order of prophecy was\nliable, arose both from its ecstatic temper and from its connection\nwith public affairs.\n\nReligious ecstasy is always dangerous to the moral and intellectual\ninterests of religion. The largest prophetic figures of the period,\nthough they feel the ecstasy, attain their greatness by rising\nsuperior to it. Elijah's raptures are impressive; but nobler are\nhis defence of Naboth and his denunciation of Ahab. And so Elisha's\ninducement of the prophetic mood by music is the least attractive\nelement in his career: his greatness lies in his combination of the\ncare of souls with political insight and vigilance for the national\ninterests. Doubtless there were many of the sons of the prophets\nwho with smaller abilities cultivated a religion as rational and\nmoral. But for the herd ecstasy would be everything. It was so\neasily induced or imitated that much of it cannot have been genuine.\nEven where the feeling was at first sincere we can understand how\nreadily it became morbid; how fatally it might fall into sympathy\nwith that drunkenness from wine and that sexual passion which Israel\nsaw already cultivated as worship by the surrounding Canaanites. We\nmust feel these dangers of ecstasy if we would understand why Amos\ncut himself off from the Nebi'\u00eem, and why Hosea laid such emphasis\non the moral and intellectual sides of religion: _My people perish\nfor lack of knowledge_. Hosea indeed considered the degeneracy of\necstasy as a judgment: _the prophet is a fool, the man of the spirit\nis mad--for the multitude of thine iniquity_.[51] A later age derided\nthe ecstatics, and took one of the forms of the verb _to prophesy_ as\nequivalent to the verb _to be mad_.[52]\n\nBut temptations as gross beset the prophet from that which should have\nbeen the discipline of his ecstasy--his connection with public affairs.\nOnly some prophets were brave rebukers of the king and the people.\nThe herd which fed at the royal table--four hundred under Ahab--were\nflatterers, who could not tell the truth, who said Peace, peace, when\nthere was no peace. These were false prophets. Yet it is curious that\nthe very early narrative which describes them[53] does not impute\ntheir falsehood to any base motives of their own, but to the direct\ninspiration of God, who sent forth a lying spirit upon them. So great\nwas the reverence still for the _man of the spirit_! Rather than doubt\nhis inspiration, they held his very lies to be inspired. One does not\nof course mean that these consenting prophets were conscious liars;\nbut that their dependence on the king, their servile habits of speech,\ndisabled them from seeing the truth. Subserviency to the powerful was\ntheir great temptation. In the story of Balaam we see confessed the\nbase instinct that he who paid the prophet should have the word of the\nprophet in his favour. In Israel prophecy went through exactly the same\nstruggle between the claims of its God and the claims of its patrons.\nNor were those patrons always the rich. The bulk of the prophets were\ndependent on the charitable gifts of the common people, and in this we\nmay find reason for that subjection of so many of them to the vulgar\nideals of the national destiny, to signs of which we are pointed by\nAmos. The priest at Bethel only reflects public opinion when he takes\nfor granted that the prophet is a thoroughly mercenary character:\n_Seer, get thee gone to the land of Judah; eat there thy bread, and\nplay the prophet there!_[54] No wonder Amos separates himself from such\nhireling craftsmen!\n\n * * * * *\n\nSuch was the course of prophecy up to Elisha, and the borders of\nthe eighth century. We have seen how even for the ancient prophet,\nmere soothsayer though we might regard him in respect of the rude\ninstruments of his office, there were present moral opportunities of\nthe highest kind, from which, if he only proved true to them, we cannot\nconceive the Spirit of God to have been absent. In early Israel we are\nsure that the Spirit did meet such strong and pure characters, from\nMoses to Samuel, creating by their means the nation of Israel, welding\nit to a unity, which was not only political but moral--and moral to a\ndegree not elsewhere realised in the Semitic world. We saw how a new\nrace of prophets arose under Samuel, separate from the older forms\nof prophecy by lot and oracle, separate, too, from the ritual as a\nwhole; and therefore free for a moral and spiritual advance of which\nthe priesthood, still bound to images and the ancient rites, proved\nthemselves incapable. But this new order of prophecy, besides its moral\nopportunities, had also its moral perils: its ecstasy was dangerous,\nits connection with public affairs was dangerous too. Again, the test\nwas the personal character of the prophet himself. And so once more we\nsee raised above the herd great personalities, who carry forward the\nwork of their predecessors. The results are, besides the discipline\nof the monarchy and the defence of justice and the poor, the firm\nestablishment of Jehovah as the one and only God of Israel, and the\nimpression on Israel both of His omnipotent guidance of them in the\npast, and of a worldwide destiny, still vague but brilliant, which He\nhad prepared for them in the future.\n\nThis brings us to Elisha, and from Elisha there are but forty years\nto Amos. During those forty years, however, there arose within Israel\na new civilisation; beyond her there opened up a new world; and with\nAssyria there entered the resources of Providence, a new power. It\nwas these three facts--the New Civilisation, the New World and the\nNew Power--which made the difference between Elisha and Amos, and\nraised prophecy from a national to a universal religion.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[17] Herodotus, viii. 36, 37.\n\n[18] _Tim\u00e6us_, 71, 72. The whole passage is worth transcribing:--\n\n\"No man, when in his senses, attains prophetic truth and inspiration;\nbut when he receives the inspired word either his intelligence\nis enthralled by sleep, or he is demented by some distemper or\npossession. And he who would understand what he remembers to have\nbeen said, whether in dream or when he was awake, by the prophetic\nand enthusiastic nature, or what he has seen, must recover his\nsenses; and then he will be able to explain rationally what all such\nwords and apparitions mean, and what indications they afford, to this\nman or that, of past, present, or future, good and evil. But, while\nhe continues demented, he cannot judge of the visions which he sees\nor the words which he utters; the ancient saying is very true that\n'only a man in his senses can act or judge about himself and his own\naffairs.' And for this reason it is customary to appoint diviners or\ninterpreters as discerners of the oracles of the gods. Some persons\ncall them prophets; they do not know that they are only repeaters of\ndark sayings and visions, and are not to be called prophets at all,\nbut only interpreters of prophecy.\"--Jowett's _Translation_.\n\n[19] _Nik._, i. 91.\n\n[20] _Ph\u00e6drus_, 262 D.\n\n[21] It is still a controversy whether the original meaning of the\nSemitic root KHN is prophet, as in the Arabic K\u00e2HiN, or priest, as in\nthe Hebrew K\u00f4HeN.\n\n[22] Cf. Jer. ii. 10: _For pass over to the isles of Chittim, and\nsee; and send unto Kedar, and consider diligently; and see if there\nbe such a thing. Hath a nation changed their gods?_ From the isles of\nChittim unto Kedar--the limits of the Semitic world.\n\n[23] Numbers xxiv. 4, _falling but having his eyes open_. Ver. 1,\n_enchantments_ ought to be _omens_.\n\n[24] Instanced by Wellhausen, _Skizzen u. Vorarb._, No. v.\n\n[25] \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9\n\n[26] \u05e8\u05b9\u05d0\u05b6\u05d4\n\n[27] \u05d7\u05d6\u05b6\u05d4\n\n[28] Deut. xiii. 1 ff. admits that heathen seers were able to work\nmiracles and give signs, as well as the prophets of Jehovah.\n\n[29] Cf. Mesha's account of himself and Chemosh on the Moabite Stone,\nwith the narrative of the taking of Ai in the Book of Joshua.\n\n[30] Cf. Kuenen: _Gesammelte Alhandlungen_ (trans. by Budde), p. 461.\n\n[31] So in Deborah's Song.\n\n[32] 1 Sam. ix. 9.\n\n[33] 1 Sam. x. 1-16, xi. 1-11, 15. Chap. x. 17-27, xi. 12-14, belong\nto other and later documents. Cf. Robertson Smith, _Old Testament in\nthe Jewish Church_, 135 ff.\n\n[34] 1 Sam. xix. 20-24.\n\n[35] What seemed most to induce the frenzy of the dervishes whom I\nwatched was the fixing of their attention upon, the yearning of their\nminds after, the love of God. \"Ya habeebi!\"--\"O my beloved!\"--they\ncried.\n\n[36] Cornill, in the first of his lectures on _Der Israelitische\nProphetismus_, one of the very best popular studies of prophecy, by a\nmaster on the subject. See p. 73 _n_.\n\n[37] It is now past doubt that these were two sacred stones used for\ndecision in the case of an alternative issue. This is plain from the\namended reading of Saul's prayer in 1 Sam. xiv. 41, 42 (after the\nLXX.): _O Jehovah God of Israel, wherefore hast Thou not answered Thy\nservant this day? If the iniquity be in me or in Jonathan my son, O\nJehovah God of Israel, give Urim: and if it be in Thy people Israel,\ngive, I pray Thee, Thummim._\n\n[38] Hosea iii. 4. See next chapter, p. 38.\n\n[39] Cf. Deut. xxviii. 34.\n\n[40] 2 Sam. xii. 1 ff.\n\n[41] 1 Kings xi. 29; xii. 22.\n\n[42] 1 Kings xiv. 2, 7-11; xix. 15 f.; 2 Kings ix. 3 ff.\n\n[43] 1 Kings xxii. 5 ff.; 2 Kings iii. 11 ff.\n\n[44] 1 Kings xxi. 1 ff.\n\n[45] 2 Kings vi.-viii., etc.\n\n[46] 1 Kings xviii. 46; 2 Kings iii. 15.\n\n[47] 3 Kings ix. 11. _Mad fellow_, not necessarily a term of reproach.\n\n[48] 1 Kings xviii. 4, cf. 19; 2 Kings ii. 3, 5; iv. 38-44; v. 20\nff.; vi. 1 ff.; viii. 8 f., etc.\n\n[49] 1 Kings xviii. 19; xxii. 6.\n\n[50] So Elijah, 2 Kings i. 8: cf. John the Baptist, Matt. iii. 4.\n\n[51] Hosea ix. 7.\n\n[52] Jer. xxix. 26: _Every man that is mad, and worketh himself into\nprophecy_ (\u05de\u05ea\u05e0\u05d1\u05d0, the same form as is used without moral reproach in\n1 Sam. x. 10 ff.).\n\n[53] 1 Kings xxii.\n\n[54] Amos vii. 12.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER III\n\n _THE EIGHTH CENTURY IN ISRAEL_\n\n\nThe long life of Elisha fell to its rest on the margin of the eighth\ncentury.[55] He had seen much evil upon Israel. The people were smitten\nin all their coasts. None of their territory across Jordan was left\nto them; and not only Hazael and his Syrians, but bands of their own\nformer subjects, the Moabites, periodically raided Western Palestine,\nup to the very gates of Samaria.[56] Such a state of affairs determined\nthe activity of the last of the older prophets. Elisha spent his life\nin the duties of the national defence, and in keeping alive the spirit\nof Israel against her foes. When he died they called him _Israel's\nchariot and the horsemen thereof_,[57] so incessant had been both his\nmilitary vigilance[58] and his political insight.[59] But Elisha was\nable to leave behind him the promise of a new day of victory.[60]\nIt was in the peace and liberty of this day that Israel rose a step\nin civilisation; that prophecy, released from the defence, became\nthe criticism, of the national life; and that the people, no longer\nabsorbed in their own borders, looked out, and for the first time\nrealised the great world, of which they were only a part.\n\nKing Joash, whose arms the dying Elisha had blessed, won back in the\nsixteen years of his reign (798-783) the cities which the Syrians\nhad taken from his father.[61] His successor, Jeroboam II., came in,\ntherefore, with a flowing tide. He was a strong man, and he took\nadvantage of it. During his long reign of about forty years (783-743)\nhe restored the border of Israel from the Pass of Hamath between the\nLebanons to the Dead Sea, and occupied at least part of the territory\nof Damascus.[62] This means that the constant raids to which Israel\nhad been subjected now ceased, and that by the time of Amos, about\n755, a generation was grown up who had not known defeat, and the most\nof whom had perhaps no experience even of war.\n\nAlong the same length of years Uzziah (_circa_ 778-740) had dealt\nsimilarly with Judah.[63] He had pushed south to the Red Sea, while\nJeroboam pushed north to Hamath; and while Jeroboam had taken the\nSyrian towns he had crushed the Philistine. He had reorganised the\narmy, and invented new engines of siege for casting stones. On such\nof his frontiers as were opposed to the desert he had built towers:\nthere is no better means of keeping the nomads in subjection.\n\nAll this meant such security across broad Israel as had not been\nknown since the glorious days of Solomon. Agriculture must everywhere\nhave revived: Uzziah, the Chronicler tells us, _loved husbandry_.\nBut we hear most of Trade and Building. With quarters in Damascus\nand a port on the Red Sea, with allies in the Ph\u0153nician towns\nand tributaries in the Philistine, with command of all the main\nroutes between Egypt and the North as between the Desert and the\nLevant, Israel, during those forty years of Jeroboam and Uzziah,\nmust have become a busy and a wealthy commercial power. Hosea calls\nthe Northern Kingdom a very Canaan[64]--Canaanite being the Hebrew\nterm for trader--as we should say a very Jew; and Amos exposes all\nthe restlessness, the greed, and the indifference to the poor of\na community making haste to be rich. The first effect of this was\na large increase of the towns and of town-life. Every document of\nthe time--up to 720--speaks to us of its buildings.[65] In ordinary\nbuilding houses of ashlar seem to be novel enough to be mentioned.\nVast _palaces_--the name of them first heard of in Israel under Omri\nand his Ph\u0153nician alliance, and then only as that of the king's\ncitadel[66]--are now built by wealthy grandees out of money extorted\nfrom the poor; they can have risen only since the Syrian wars. There\nare summer houses in addition to winter houses; and it is not only\nthe king, as in the days of Ahab, who furnishes his buildings with\nivory. When an earthquake comes and whole cities are overthrown,\nthe vigour and wealth of the people are such that they build more\nstrongly and lavishly than before.[67] With all this we have the\ncharacteristic tempers and moods of city-life: the fickleness and\nliability to panic which are possible only where men are gathered\nin crowds; the luxury and false art which are engendered only by\nartificial conditions of life; the deep poverty which in all cities,\nfrom the beginning to the end of time, lurks by the side of the most\nbrilliant wealth, its dark and inevitable shadow.\n\nIn short, in the half-century between Elisha and Amos, Israel rose\nfrom one to another of the great stages of culture. Till the eighth\ncentury they had been but a kingdom of fighting husbandmen. Under\nJeroboam and Uzziah city-life was developed, and civilisation, in the\nproper sense of the word, appeared. Only once before had Israel taken\nso large a step: when they crossed Jordan, leaving the nomadic life for\nthe agricultural; and that had been momentous for their religion. They\ncame among new temptations: the use of wine, and the shrines of local\ngods who were believed to have more influence on the fertility of the\nland than Jehovah who had conquered it for His people. But now this\nfurther step, from the agricultural stage to the mercantile and civil,\nwas equally fraught with danger. There was the closer intercourse with\nforeign nations and their cults. There were all the temptations of\nrapid wealth, all the dangers of an equally increasing poverty. The\ngrowth of comfort among the rulers meant the growth of thoughtlessness.\nCruelty multiplied with refinement. The upper classes were lifted\naway from feeling the real woes of the people. There was a well-fed\nand sanguine patriotism, but at the expense of indifference to social\nsin and want. Religious zeal and liberality increased, but they were\ncoupled with all the proud's misunderstanding of God: an optimist faith\nwithout moral insight or sympathy.\n\nIt is all this which makes the prophets of the eighth century so\nmodern, while Elisha's life is still so ancient. With him we are back\nin the times of our own border wars--of Wallace and Bruce, with their\nstruggles for the freedom of the soil. With Amos we stand among the\nconditions of our own day. The City has arisen. For the development\nof the highest form of prophecy, the universal and permanent form,\nthere was needed that marvellously unchanging mould of human life,\nwhose needs and sorrows, whose sins and problems, are to-day the same\nas they were all those thousands of years ago.\n\nWith Civilisation came Literature. The long peace gave leisure for\nwriting; and the just pride of the people in boundaries broad as\nSolomon's own, determined that this writing should take the form of\nheroic history. In the parallel reigns of Jeroboam and Uzziah many\ncritics have placed the great epics of Israel: the earlier documents\nof our Pentateuch which trace God's purposes to mankind by Israel,\nfrom the creation of the world to the settlement of the Promised\nLand; the histories which make up our Books of Judges, Samuel and\nKings. But whether all these were composed now or at an earlier date,\nit is certain that the nation lived in the spirit of them, proud of\nits past, aware of its vocation, and confident that its God, who had\ncreated the world and so mightily led itself, would bring it from\nvictory by victory to a complete triumph over the heathen. Israel of\nthe eighth century were devoted to Jehovah; and although passion or\nself-interest might lead individuals or even communities to worship\nother gods, He had no possible rival upon the throne of the nation.\n\nAs they delighted to recount His deeds by their fathers, so they\nthronged the scenes of these with sacrifice and festival. Bethel\nand Beersheba, Dan and Gilgal, were the principal;[68] but Mizpeh,\nthe top of Tabor,[69] and Carmel,[70] perhaps Penuel,[71] were also\nconspicuous among the countless _high places_[72] of the land. Of\nthose in Northern Israel Bethel was the chief. It enjoyed the proper\nsite for an ancient shrine, which was nearly always a market as\nwell--near a frontier and where many roads converged; where traders\nfrom the East could meet half-way with traders from the West, the\nwool-growers of Moab and the Jud\u00e6an desert with the merchants of\nPh\u0153nicia and the Philistine coast. Here, on the spot on which the\nfather of the nation had seen heaven open,[73] a great temple was\nnow built, with a priesthood endowed and directed by the crown,[74]\nbut lavishly supported also by the tithes and free-will offerings\nof the people.[75] _It is a sanctuary of the king and a house of\nthe kingdom._[76] Jeroboam had ordained Dan, at the other end of\nthe kingdom, to be the fellow of Bethel;[77] but Dan was far away\nfrom the bulk of the people, and in the eighth century Bethel's real\nrival was Gilgal.[78] Whether this was the Gilgal by Jericho, or the\nother Gilgal on the Samarian hills near Shiloh, is uncertain. The\nlatter had been a sanctuary in Elijah's day, with a settlement of the\nprophets; but the former must have proved the greater attraction to a\npeople so devoted to the sacred events of their past. Was it not the\nfirst resting-place of the Ark after the passage of Jordan, the scene\nof the reinstitution of circumcision, of the anointing of the first\nking, of Judah's second submission to David?[79] As there were many\nGilgals in the land--literally _cromlechs_, ancient _stone-circles_\nsacred to the Canaanites as well as to Israel--so there were many\nMizpehs, _Watchtowers_, _Seers' stations_: the one mentioned by Hosea\nwas probably in Gilead.[80] To the southern Beersheba, to which\nElijah had fled from Jezebel, pilgrimages were made by northern\nIsraelites traversing Judah. The sanctuary on Carmel was the ancient\naltar of Jehovah which Elijah had rebuilt; but Carmel seems at\nthis time to have lain, as it did so often, in the power of the\nPh\u0153nicians, for it is imagined by the prophets only as a hiding-place\nfrom the face of Jehovah.[81]\n\nAt all these sanctuaries it was Jehovah and no other who was\nsought: _thy God, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of\nEgypt_.[82] At Bethel and at Dan He was adored in the form of a calf;\nprobably at Gilgal also, for there is a strong tradition to that\neffect;[83] and elsewhere men still consulted the other images which\nhad been used by Saul and by David, the Ephod and the Teraphim.[84]\nWith these there was the old Semitic symbol of the Ma\u00e7\u00e7ebah, or\nupright stone on which oil was poured.[85] All of them had been used\nin the worship of Jehovah by the great examples and leaders of the\npast; all of them had been spared by Elijah and Elisha: it was no\nwonder that the common people of the eighth century felt them to be\nindispensable elements of religion, the removal of which, like the\nremoval of the monarchy or of sacrifice itself, would mean utter\ndivorce from the nation's God.[86]\n\nOne great exception must be made. Compared with the sanctuaries we\nhave mentioned, Zion itself was very modern. But it contained the\nmain repository of Israel's religion, the Ark, and in connection with\nthe Ark the worship of Jehovah was not a worship of images. It is\nsignificant that from this, the original sanctuary of Israel, with the\npure worship, the new prophecy derived its first inspiration. But to\nthat we shall return later with Amos.[87] Apart from the Ark, Jerusalem\nwas not free from images, nor even from the altars of foreign deities.\n\nWhere the externals of the ritual were thus so much the same as those\nof the Canaanite cults, which were still practised in and around the\nland, it is not surprising that the worship of Jehovah should be\nfurther invaded by many pagan practices, nor that Jehovah Himself\nshould be regarded with imaginations steeped in pagan ideas of the\nGodhead. That even the foulest tempers of the Canaanite ritual,\nthose inspired by wine and the sexual passion, were licensed in the\nsanctuaries of Israel, both Amos and Hosea testify. But the worst\nof the evil was wrought in the popular conception of God. Let us\nremember again that Jehovah had no real rival at this time in the\ndevotion of His people, and that their faith was expressed both by\nthe legal forms of His religion and by a liberality which exceeded\nthese. The tithes were paid to Him, and paid, it would appear,\nwith more than legal frequency.[88] Sabbath and New Moon, as days\nof worship and rest from business, were observed with a Pharisaic\nscrupulousness for the letter if not for the spirit.[89] The\nprescribed festivals were held, and thronged by zealous devotees who\nrivalled each other in the amount of their free-will offerings.[90]\nPilgrimages were made to Bethel, to Gilgal, to far Beersheba, and the\nvery way to the latter appeared as sacred to the Israelite as the\nway to Mecca does to a pious Moslem of to-day.[91] Yet, in spite\nof all this devotion to their God, Israel had no true ideas of Him.\nTo quote Amos, they sought His sanctuaries, but Him they did not\nseek; in the words of Hosea's frequent plaint, they _did not know\nHim_. To the mass of the people, to their governors, their priests,\nand the most of their prophets, Jehovah was but the characteristic\nSemitic deity--patron of His people, and caring for them alone--who\nhad helped them in the past, and was bound to help them still--very\njealous as to the correctness of His ritual and the amount of His\nsacrifices, but indifferent about real morality. Nay, there were\nstill darker streaks in their views of Him. A god, figured as an ox,\ncould not be adored by a cattle-breeding people without starting\nin their minds thoughts too much akin to the foul tempers of the\nCanaanite faiths. These things it is almost a shame to mention; but\nwithout knowing that they fermented in the life of that generation,\nwe shall not appreciate the vehemence of Amos or of Hosea.\n\nSuch a religion had no discipline for the busy, mercenary life of\nthe day. Injustice and fraud were rife in the very precincts of the\nsanctuary. Magistrates and priests alike were smitten with their\ngeneration's love of money, and did everything for reward. Again\nand again do the prophets speak of bribery. Judges took gifts and\nperverted the cause of the poor; priests drank the mulcted wine,\nand slept on the pledged garments of religious offenders. There\nwas no disinterested service of God or of the commonweal. Mammon\nwas supreme. The influence of the commercial character of the age\nappears in another very remarkable result. An agricultural community\nis always sensitive to the religion of nature. They are awed by\nits chastisements--droughts, famines and earthquakes. They feel\nits majestic order in the course of the seasons, the procession of\nday and night, the march of the great stars all the host of the\nLord of hosts. But Amos seems to have had to break into passionate\nreminders of Him that maketh Orion and the Pleiades, and turneth\nthe murk into morning.[92] Several physical calamities visited the\nland. The locusts are bad in Palestine every sixth or seventh year:\none year before Amos began they had been very bad. There was a\nmonstrous drought, followed by a famine. There was a long-remembered\nearthquake--_the earthquake in the days of Uzziah_. With Egypt so\nnear, the home of the plague, and with so much war afoot in Northern\nSyria, there were probably more pestilences in Western Asia than\nthose recorded in 803, 765 and 759. There was a total eclipse of\nthe sun in 763. But of all these, except perhaps the pestilence, a\ncommercial people are independent as an agricultural are not. Israel\nspeedily recovered from them, without any moral improvement. Even\nwhen the earthquake came _they said in pride and stoutness of heart,\nThe bricks are fallen down, but we will build with hewn stones; the\nsycamores are cut down, but we will change to cedars_.[93] It was\na marvellous generation--so joyous, so energetic, so patriotic, so\ndevout! But its strength was the strength of cruel wealth, its peace\nthe peace of an immoral religion.\n\nI have said that the age is very modern, and we shall indeed go to\nits prophets feeling that they speak to conditions of life extremely\nlike our own. But if we wish a still closer analogy from our history,\nwe must travel back to the fourteenth century in England--Langland's\nand Wyclif's century, which, like this one in Israel, saw both the\nfirst real attempts towards a national literature, and the first real\nattempts towards a moral and religious reform. Then as in Israel a\nlong and victorious reign was drawing to a close, under the threat\nof disaster when it should have passed. Then as in Israel there had\nbeen droughts, earthquakes and pestilences with no moral results upon\nthe nation. Then also there was a city life developing at the expense\nof country life. Then also the wealthy began to draw aloof from the\npeople. Then also there was a national religion, zealously cultivated\nand endowed by the liberality of the people, but superstitious,\nmercenary, and corrupted by sexual disorder. Then too there were many\npilgrimages to popular shrines, and the land was strewn with mendicant\npriests and hireling preachers. And then too prophecy raised its voice,\nfor the first time fearless in England. As we study the verses of Amos\nwe shall find again and again the most exact parallels to them in the\nverses of Langland's _Vision of Piers the Plowman_, which denounce the\nsame vices in Church and State, and enforce the same principles of\nreligion and morality.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIt was when the reign of Jeroboam was at its height of assured\nvictory, when the nation's prosperity seemed impregnable after the\nsurvival of those physical calamities, when the worship and the\ncommerce were in full course throughout the land, that the first of\nthe new prophets broke out against Israel in the name of Jehovah,\nthreatening judgment alike upon the new civilisation of which they\nwere so proud and the old religion in which they were so confident.\nThese prophets were inspired by feelings of the purest morality,\nby the passionate conviction that God could no longer bear such\nimpurity and disorder. But, as we have seen, no prophet in Israel\never worked on the basis of principles only. He came always in\nalliance with events. These first appeared in the shape of the great\nphysical disasters. But a more powerful instrument of Providence, in\nthe service of judgment, was appearing on the horizon. This was the\nAssyrian Empire. So vast was its influence on prophecy that we must\ndevote to it a separate chapter.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[55] He died in 798 or 797.\n\n[56] 2 Kings x. 32, xiii. 20, 22.\n\n[57] 2 Kings xiii. 14.\n\n[58] vi. 12 ff., etc.\n\n[59] viii., etc.\n\n[60] xiii. 17 ff.\n\n[61] 2 Kings xiii. 22-25.\n\n[62] xiv. 28, if not Damascus itself.\n\n[63] 2 Kings xv.: cf. 2 Chron. xxvi.\n\n[64] xii. 7 (Heb. ver. 8). Trans., _As for Canaan, the balances, etc._\n\n[65] Amos, _passim_. Hosea viii. 14, etc.; Micah iii. 12; Isa. ix. 10.\n\n[66] \u05d0\u05e8\u05de\u05d5\u05df, a word not found in the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, or\nSamuel, is used in 1 Kings xvi. 18, 2 Kings xv. 25, for a citadel\nwithin the palace of the king. Similarly in Isa. xxv. 2; Pro. xviii.\n19. But in Amos generally of any large or grand house. That the name\nfirst appears in the time of Omri's alliance with Tyre, points to a\nPh\u0153nician origin. Probably from root \u05d0\u05e8\u05dd, _to be high_.\n\n[67] Isa. ix. 10.\n\n[68] 1 Kings xii. 25 ff., and Amos and Hosea _passim_.\n\n[69] Hosea v. 1.\n\n[70] 1 Kings xviii. 30 ff.\n\n[71] 1 Kings xii. 25.\n\n[72] Originally so called from their elevation (though oftener on the\nflank than on the summit of a hill); but like the name High Street or\nthe Scottish High Kirk, the term came to be dissociated from physical\nheight and was applied to any sanctuary, even in a hollow, like so\nmany of the sacred wells.\n\n[73] The sanctuary itself was probably on the present site of the Burj\nBeitin (with the ruins of an early Christian Church), some few minutes\nto the south-east of the present village of Beitin, which probably\nrepresents the city of Bethel that was called Luz at the first.\n\n[74] 1 Kings xii. 25 ff.; Amos vii.\n\n[75] Amos iv. 4.\n\n[76] Amos vii. 13.\n\n[77] 1 Kings xii. 25 ff.\n\n[78] Curiously enough conceived by many of the early Christian\nFathers as containing the second of the calves. Cyril, _Comm. in\nHoseam_, 5; Epiph., _De Vitis Proph._, 237; _Chron. Pasc._, 161.\n\n[79] Josh. iv. 20 ff., v. 2 ff.; 1 Sam. xi. 14, 15, etc.; 2 Sam.\nxix. 15, 40. This Gilgal by Jericho fell to N. Israel after the\nDisruption; but there is nothing in Amos or Hosea to tell us,\nwhether it or the Gilgal near Shiloh, which seems to have absorbed\nthe sanctity of the latter, is the shrine which they couple with\nBethel--except that they never talk of \"going up\" to it. The passage\nfrom Epiphanius in previous note speaks of the Gilgal with the calf\nas the \"Gilgal which is in Shiloh.\"\n\n[80] Site uncertain. See _Hist. Geog._, pp. 579, 586.\n\n[81] Amos ix. 3. But cf. i. 2.\n\n[82] 2 Kings xii. 28.\n\n[83] See above, p. 37, _n._ 1.\n\n[84] The Ephod, _the plated thing_; presumably a wooden image covered\neither with a skin of metal or a cloak of metal. The Teraphim were\nimages in human shape.\n\n[85] The _menhir_ of modern Palestine--not a hewn pillar, but oblong\nnatural stone narrowing a little towards the top (cf. W. R. Smith,\n_Religion of the Semites_, 183-188). From Hosea x. 1, 2, it would\nappear that the ma\u00e7\u00e7eboth of the eighth century were artificial.\n_They make good_ ma\u00e7\u00e7eboth (A.V. wrongly _images_).\n\n[86] So indeed Hosea iii. 4 implies. The Asherah, the pole or\nsymbolic tree of Canaanite worship, does not appear to have been used\nas a part of the ritual of Jehovah's worship. But, that there was\nconstantly a temptation so to use it, is clear from Deut. xvi. 21,\n22. See Driver on that passage.\n\n[87] See below, p. 99.\n\n[88] Amos iv. 4 ff.\n\n[89] Amos vii. 4: cf. 2 Kings v. 23.\n\n[90] Amos iv. 4 f.\n\n[91] See below, p. 185.\n\n[92] But whether these be by Amos see Chap. XI.\n\n[93] Isa ix. 10.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IV\n\n _THE INFLUENCE OF ASSYRIA UPON PROPHECY_\n\n\nBy far the greatest event in the eighth century before Christ was the\nappearance of Assyria in Palestine. To Israel since the Exodus and\nConquest, nothing had happened capable of so enormous an influence at\nonce upon their national fortunes and their religious development.\nBut while the Exodus and Conquest had advanced the political and\nspiritual progress of Israel in equal proportion, the effect of the\nAssyrian invasion was to divorce these two interests, and destroy the\nstate while it refined and confirmed the religion. After permitting\nthe Northern Kingdom to reach an extent and splendour unrivalled\nsince the days of Solomon, Assyria overthrew it in 721 and left all\nIsrael scarcely a third of their former magnitude. But while Assyria\nproved so disastrous to the state, her influence upon the prophecy\nof the period was little short of creative. Humanly speaking, this\nhighest stage of Israel's religion could not have been achieved by\nthe prophets except in alliance with the armies of that heathen\nempire. Before then we turn to their pages it may be well for us\nto make clear in what directions Assyria performed this spiritual\nservice for Israel. While pursuing this inquiry we may be able to\nfind answers to the scarcely less important questions: why the\nprophets were at first doubtful of the part Assyria was destined to\nplay in the providence of the Almighty? and why, when the prophets\nwere at last convinced of the certainty of Israel's overthrow, the\nstatesmen of Israel and the bulk of the people still remained so\nunconcerned about her coming, or so sanguine of their power to resist\nher? This requires, to begin with, a summary of the details of the\nAssyrian advance upon Palestine.\n\nIn the far past Palestine had often been the hunting-ground of the\nAssyrian kings. But after 1100 B.C., and for nearly two centuries\nand a half, her states were left to themselves. Then Assyria resumed\nthe task of breaking down that disbelief in her power with which\nher long withdrawal seems to have inspired their politics. In 870\nAssurnasirpal reached the Levant, and took tribute from Tyre and\nSidon. Omri was reigning in Samaria, and must have come into close\nrelations with the Assyrians, for during more than a century and a\nhalf after his death they still called the land of Israel by his\nname.[94] In 854 Salmanassar II. defeated at Karkar the combined\nforces of Ahab and Benhadad. In 850, 849 and 846 he conducted\ncampaigns against Damascus. In 842 he received tribute from Jehu,[95]\nand in 839 again fought Damascus under Hazael. After this there\npassed a whole generation during which Assyria came no farther\nsouth than Arpad, some sixty miles north of Damascus; and Hazael\nemployed the respite in those campaigns which proved so disastrous\nfor Israel, by robbing her of the provinces across Jordan, and\nravaging the country about Samaria.[96] In 803 Assyria returned, and\naccomplished the siege and capture of Damascus. The first consequence\nto Israel was that restoration of her hopes under Joash, at which\nthe aged Elisha was still spared to assist,[97] and which reached\nits fulfilment in the recovery of all Eastern Palestine by Jeroboam\nII.[98] Jeroboam's own relations to Assyria have not been recorded\neither by the Bible or by the Assyrian monuments. It is hard to think\nthat he paid no tribute to the \"king of kings.\" At all events it is\ncertain that, while Assyria again overthrew the Arameans of Damascus\nin 773 and their neighbours of Hadrach in 772 and 765, Jeroboam\nwas himself invading Aramean land, and the Book of Kings even\nattributes to him an extension of territory, or at least of political\ninfluence, up to the northern mouth of the great pass between the\nLebanons.[99] For the next twenty years Assyria only once came as\nfar as Lebanon--to Hadrach in 759--and it may have been this long\nquiescence which enabled the rulers and people of Israel to forget,\nif indeed their religion and sanguine patriotism had ever allowed\nthem to realise, how much the conquests and splendour of Jeroboam's\nreign were due, not to themselves, but to the heathen power which had\nmaimed their oppressors. Their dreams were brief. Before Jeroboam\nhimself was dead, a new king had usurped the Assyrian throne (745\nB.C.) and inaugurated a more vigorous policy. Borrowing the name\nof the ancient Tiglath-Pileser, he followed that conqueror's path\nacross the Euphrates. At first it seemed as if he was to suffer\ncheck. His forces were engrossed by the siege of Arpad for three\nyears (_c._ 743), and this delay, along with that of two years more,\nduring which he had to return to the conquest of Babylon, may well\nhave given cause to the courts of Damascus and Samaria to believe\nthat the Assyrian power had not really revived. Combining, they\nattacked Judah under Ahaz. But Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-Pileser, who\nwithin a year (734-733) had overthrown Damascus and carried captive\nthe populations of Gilead and Galilee. There could now be no doubt\nas to what the Assyrian power meant for the political fortunes of\nIsrael. Before this resistless and inexorable empire, the people of\nJehovah were as the most frail of their neighbours--sure of defeat,\nand sure, too, of that terrible captivity in exile which formed the\nnovel policy of the invaders against the tribes who withstood them.\nIsrael dared to withstand. The vassal Hoshea, whom the Assyrians\nhad placed on the throne of Samaria in 730, kept back his tribute.\nThe people rallied to him; and for more than three years this\nlittle tribe of highlanders resisted in their capital the Assyrian\nsiege. Then came the end. Samaria fell in 721, and Israel went into\ncaptivity beyond the Euphrates.\n\nIn following the course of this long tragedy, a man's heart cannot\nbut feel that _all_ the splendour and the glory did not lie with the\nprophets, in spite of their being the only actors in the drama who\nperceived its moral issues and predicted its actual end. For who can\nwithhold admiration from those few tribesmen, who accepted no defeat\nas final, but so long as they were left to their fatherland rallied\ntheir ranks to its liberty and defied the huge empire. Nor was their\ncourage always as blind, as in the time of Isaiah Samaria's so fatally\nbecame. For one cannot have failed to notice, how fitful and irregular\nwas Assyria's advance, at least up to the reign of Tiglath-Pileser;\nnor how prolonged and doubtful were her sieges of some of the towns.\nThe Assyrians themselves do not always record spoil or tribute after\nwhat they are pleased to call their victories over the cities of\nPalestine. To the same campaign they had often to return for several\nyears in succession.[100] It took Tiglath-Pileser himself three years\nto reduce Arpad; Salmanassar IV. besieged Samaria for three years, and\nwas slain before it yielded. These facts enable us to understand that,\napart from the moral reasons which the prophets urged for the certainty\nof Israel's overthrow by Assyria, it was always within the range of\npolitical possibility that Assyria would not come back, and that\nwhile she was engaged with revolts of other portions of her huge and\ndisorganised empire, a combined revolution on the part of her Syrian\nvassals would be successful. The prophets themselves felt the influence\nof these chances. They were not always confident, as we shall see,\nthat Assyria was to be the means of Israel's overthrow. Amos, and in\nhis earlier years Isaiah, describe her with a caution and a vagueness\nfor which there is no other explanation than the political uncertainty\nthat again and again hung over the future of her advance upon Syria.\nIt, then, even in those high minds, to whom the moral issue was so\nclear, the political form that issue should assume was yet temporarily\nuncertain, what good reasons must the mere statesmen of Syria have\noften felt for the proud security which filled the intervals between\nthe Assyrian invasions, or the sanguine hopes which inspired their\nresistance to the latter.\n\nWe must not cast over the whole Assyrian advance the triumphant\nair of the annals of such kings as Tiglath-Pileser or Sennacherib.\nCampaigning in Palestine was a dangerous business even to the Romans;\nand for the Assyrian armies there was always possible besides some\nsudden recall by the rumour of a revolt in a distant province. Their\nown annals supply us with good reasons for the sanguine resistance\noffered to them by the tribes of Palestine. No defeat, of course, is\nrecorded; but the annals are full of delays and withdrawals. Then the\nPlague would break out; we know how in the last year of the century\nit turned Sennacherib, and saved Jerusalem.[101] In short, up almost\nto the end the Syrian chiefs had some fair political reasons for\nresistance to a power which had so often defeated them; while at the\nvery end, when no such reason remained and our political sympathy is\nexhausted, we feel it replaced by an even warmer admiration for their\ndesperate defence. Mere mountain-cats of tribes as some of them were,\nthey held their poorly furnished rocks against one, two or three\nyears of cruel siege.\n\nIn Israel these political reasons for courage against Assyria were\nenforced by the whole instincts of the popular religion. The century\nhad felt a new outburst of enthusiasm for Jehovah.[102] This was\nconsequent, not only upon the victories He had granted over Aram, but\nupon the literature of the peace which followed those victories: the\ncollection of the stories of the ancient miracles of Jehovah in the\nbeginning of His people's history, and of the purpose He had even then\nannounced of bringing Israel to supreme rank in the world. Such a God,\nso anciently manifested, so recently proved, could never surrender His\nown nation to a mere Go\u00ee[103]--a heathen and a barbarian people. Add\nthis dogma of the popular religion of Israel to those substantial hopes\nof Assyria's withdrawal from Palestine, and you see cause, intelligible\nand adequate, for the complacency of Jeroboam and his people to the\nfact that Assyria had at last, by the fall of Damascus, reached their\nown borders, as well as for the courage with which Hoshea in 725 threw\noff the Assyrian yoke, and, with a willing people, for three years\ndefended Samaria against the great king. Let us not think that the\nopponents of the prophets were utter fools or mere puppets of fate.\nThey had reasons for their optimism; they fought for their hearths and\naltars with a valour and a patience which proves that the nation as a\nwhole was not so corrupt, as we are sometimes, by the language of the\nprophets, tempted to suppose.\n\nBut all this--the reasonableness of the hope of resisting Assyria,\nthe valour which so stubbornly fought her, the religious faith which\nsanctioned both valour and hope--only the more vividly illustrates\nthe singular independence of the prophets, who took an opposite view,\nwho so consistently affirmed that Israel must fall, and so early\nforetold that she should fall to Assyria.\n\nThe reason of this conviction of the prophets was, of course, their\nfundamental faith in the righteousness of Jehovah. That was a belief\nquite independent of the course of events. As a matter of history,\nthe ethical reasons for Israel's doom were manifest to the prophets\nwithin Israel's own life, before the signs grew clear on the horizon\nthat the doomster was to be Assyria.[104] Nay, we may go further,\nand say that it could not possibly have been otherwise. For except\nthe prophets had been previously furnished with the ethical reasons\nfor Assyria's resistless advance on Israel, to their sensitive minds\nthat advance must have been a hopeless and a paralysing problem.\nBut they nowhere treat it as a problem. By them Assyria is always\neither welcomed as a proof or summoned as a means--the proof of their\nconviction that Israel requires humbling, the means of carrying that\nhumbling into effect. The faith of the prophets is ready for Assyria\nfrom the moment that she becomes ominous for Israel, and every\nfootfall of her armies on Jehovah's soil becomes the corroboration\nof the purpose He has already declared to His servants in the terms\nof their moral consciousness. The spiritual service which Assyria\nrendered to Israel was therefore secondary to the prophets' native\nconvictions of the righteousness of God, and could not have been\nperformed without these. This will become even more clear if we look\nfor a little at the exact nature of that service.\n\nIn its broadest effects, the Assyrian invasion meant for Israel a very\nconsiderable change in the intellectual outlook. Hitherto Israel's\nworld had virtually lain between the borders promised of old to\ntheir ambition--_the river of Egypt,_[105] _and the great river, the\nRiver Euphrates_. These had marked not merely the sphere of Israel's\npolitics, but the horizon within which Israel had been accustomed to\nobserve the action of their God and to prove His character, to feel\nthe problems of their religion rise and to grapple with them. But now\nthere burst from the outside of this little world that awful power,\nsovereign and inexorable, which effaced all distinctions and treated\nIsrael in the same manner as her heathen neighbours. This was more\nthan a widening of the world: it was a change of the very poles. At\nfirst sight it appeared merely to have increased the scale on which\nhistory was conducted; it was really an alteration of the whole\ncharacter of history. Religion itself shrivelled up, before a force so\nmuch vaster than anything it had yet encountered, and so contemptuous\nof its claims. _What is Jehovah_, said the Assyrian in his laughter,\n_more than the gods of Damascus, or of Hamath, or of the Philistines_?\nIn fact, for the mind of Israel, the crisis, though less in degree,\nwas in quality not unlike that produced in the religion of Europe by\nthe revelation of the Copernican astronomy. As the earth, previously\nbelieved to be the centre of the universe, the stage on which the Son\nof God had achieved God's eternal purposes to mankind, was discovered\nto be but a satellite of one of innumerable suns, a mere ball swung\nbeside millions of others by a force which betrayed no sign of sympathy\nwith the great transactions which took place on it, and so faith in the\nDivine worth of these was rudely shaken--so Israel, who had believed\nthemselves to be the peculiar people of the Creator, the solitary\nagents of the God of Righteousness to all mankind,[106] and who now\nfelt themselves brought to an equality with other tribes by this sheer\nforce, which, brutally indifferent to spiritual distinctions, swayed\nthe fortunes of all alike, must have been tempted to unbelief in the\nspiritual facts of their history, in the power of their God and the\ndestiny He had promised them. Nothing could have saved Israel, as\nnothing could have saved Europe, but a conception of God which rose\nto this new demand upon its powers--a faith which said, \"Our God is\nsufficient for this greater world and its forces that so dwarf our\nown; the discovery of these only excites in us a more awful wonder\nof His power.\" The prophets had such a conception of God. To them He\nwas absolute righteousness--righteousness wide as the widest world,\nstronger than the strongest force. To the prophets, therefore, the rise\nof Assyria only increased the possibilities of Providence. But it could\nnot have done this had Providence not already been invested in a God\ncapable by His character of rising to such possibilities.\n\nAssyria, however, was not only Force: she was also the symbol of\na great Idea--the Idea of Unity. We have just ventured on one\nhistorical analogy. We may try another and a more exact one. The\nEmpire of Rome, grasping the whole world in its power and reducing\nall races of men to much the same level of political rights,\npowerfully assisted Christian theology in the task of imposing upon\nthe human mind a clearer imagination of unity in the government of\nthe world and of spiritual equality among men of all nations. A\nnot dissimilar service to the faith of Israel was performed by the\nEmpire of Assyria. History, that hitherto had been but a series of\nangry pools, became as the ocean swaying in tides to one almighty\nimpulse. It was far easier to imagine a sovereign Providence when\nAssyria reduced history to a unity by overthrowing all the rulers\nand all their gods, than when history was broken up into the\nindependent fortunes of many states, each with its own religion\ndivinely valid in its own territory. By shattering the tribes Assyria\nshattered the tribal theory of religion, which we have seen to be\nthe characteristic Semitic theory--a god for every tribe, a tribe\nfor every god. The field was cleared of the many: there was room for\nthe One. That He appeared, not as the God of the conquering race,\nbut as the Deity of one of their many victims, was due to Jehovah's\nrighteousness. At this juncture, when the world was suggested to have\none throne and that throne was empty, there was a great chance, if we\nmay so put it, for a god with a character. And the only God in all\nthe Semitic world who had a character was Jehovah.\n\nIt is true that the Assyrian Empire was not constructive, like the\nRoman, and, therefore, could not assist the prophets to the idea of a\nCatholic Church. But there can be no doubt that it did assist them to\na feeling of the moral unity of mankind. A great historian has made\nthe just remark that, whatsoever widens the imagination, enabling it\nto realise the actual experience of other men, is a powerful agent\nof ethical advance.[107] Now Assyria widened the imagination and the\nsympathy of Israel in precisely this way. Consider the universal Pity\nof the Assyrian conquest: how state after state went down before it,\nhow all things mortal yielded and were swept away. The mutual hatreds\nand ferocities of men could not persist before a common Fate, so\nsublime, so tragic. And thus we understand how in Israel the old envies\nand rancours of that border warfare with her foes which had filled the\nlast four centuries of her history is replaced by a new tenderness and\ncompassion towards the national efforts, the achievements and all the\nbusy life of the Gentile peoples. Isaiah is especially distinguished\nby this in his treatment of Egypt and of Tyre; and even where he\nand others do not, as in these cases, appreciate the sadness of the\ndestruction of so much brave beauty and serviceable wealth, their\ntone in speaking of the fall of the Assyrian on their neighbours is\none of compassion and not of exultation.[108] As the rivalries and\nhatreds of individual lives are stilled in the presence of a common\ndeath, so even that factious, ferocious world of the Semites ceased\nto _fret its anger and watch it for ever_ (to quote Amos' phrase) in\nface of the universal Assyrian Fate. But in that Fate there was more\nthan Pity. On the data of the prophets Assyria was afflicting Israel\nfor moral reasons: it could not be for other reasons that she was\nafflicting their neighbours. Israel and the heathen were suffering\nfor the same righteousness' sake. What could have better illustrated\nthe moral equality of all mankind! No doubt the prophets were already\ntheoretically convinced[109] of this--for the righteousness they\nbelieved in was nothing if not universal. But it is one thing to hold\na belief on principle and another to have practical experience of\nit in history. To a theory of the moral equality of mankind Assyria\nenabled the prophets to add sympathy and conscience. We shall see all\nthis illustrated in the opening prophecies of Amos against the foreign\nnations.\n\nBut Assyria did not help to develop monotheism in Israel only by\ncontributing to the doctrines of a moral Providence and of the\nequality of all men beneath it. The influence must have extended\nto Israel's conception of God in Nature. Here, of course, Israel\nwas already possessed of great beliefs. Jehovah had created man; He\nhad divided the Red Sea and Jordan. The desert, the storm, and the\nseasons were all subject to Him. But at a time when the superstitious\nmind of the people was still feeling after other Divine powers in\nthe earth, the waters and the air of Canaan, it was a very valuable\nantidote to such dissipation of their faith to find one God swaying,\nthrough Assyria, all families of mankind. The Divine unity to which\nhistory was reduced must have reacted on Israel's views of Nature,\nand made it easier to feel one God also there. Now, as a matter of\nfact, the imagination of the unity of Nature, the belief in a reason\nand method pervading all things, was very powerfully advanced in\nIsrael throughout the Assyrian period.\n\nWe may find an illustration of this in the greater, deeper meaning in\nwhich the prophets use the old national name of Israel's God--Jehovah\n\u1e62eba'oth, _Jehovah of Hosts_. This title, which came into frequent\nuse under the early kings, when Israel's vocation was to win freedom\nby war, meant then (as far as we can gather) only _Jehovah of the\narmies of Israel_--the God of battles, the people's leader in\nwar,[110] whose home was Jerusalem, the people's capital, and His\nsanctuary their battle emblem, the Ark. Now the prophets hear Jehovah\ngo forth (as Amos does) from the same place, but to them the Name has\na far deeper significance. They never define it, but they use it in\nassociations where _hosts_ must mean something different from the\narmies of Israel. To Amos the hosts of Jehovah are not the armies\nof Israel, but those of Assyria: they are also the nations whom He\nmarshals and marches across the earth, Philistines from Caphtor,\nAram from Qir, as well as Israel from Egypt. Nay, more; according to\nthose Doxologies which either Amos or a kindred spirit has added to\nhis lofty argument,[111] Jehovah sways and orders the powers of the\nheavens: Orion and Pleiades, the clouds from the sea to the mountain\npeaks where they break, day and night in constant procession. It is\nin associations like these that the Name is used, either in its old\nform or slightly changed as _Jehovah God of hosts_, or _the hosts_;\nand we cannot but feel that the hosts of Jehovah are now looked upon\nas all the influences of earth and heaven--human armies, stars and\npowers of nature, which obey His word and work His will.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[94] \"The house of Omri\": so even in Sargon's time, 722-705.\n\n[95] The Black Obelisk of Salmanassar in the British Museum, on which\nthe messengers of Jehu are portrayed.\n\n[96] 2 Kings x. 32 f.; xiii. 3.\n\n[97] 2 Kings xiii. 14 ff.\n\n[98] The phrase in 2 Kings xiii. 5, _Jehovah gave Israel a saviour_,\nis interpreted by certain scholars as if the saviour were Assyria. In\nxiv. 27 he is plainly said to be Jeroboam.\n\n[99] The entering in of Hamath (2 Kings xiv. 25).\n\n[100] Salmanassar II. in 850, 849, 846 to war against Dad'idri of\nDamascus, and in 842 and 839 against Hazael, his successor.\n\n[101] See in this series _Isaiah_, Vol. I., pp. 359 ff.\n\n[102] See above, pp. 35 ff.\n\n[103] To use the term which Amos adopts with such ironical force: vi.\n14.\n\n[104] When we get down among the details we shall see clear evidence\nfor this fact, for instance, that Amos prophesied against Israel at\na time when he thought that the Lord's anger was to be exhausted\nin purely natural chastisements of His people, and before it was\nrevealed to him that Assyria was required to follow up these\nchastisements with a heavier blow. See Chap. VI., Section 2.\n\n[105] That is, of course, not the Nile, but the great Wady, at present\nknown as the Wady el 'Arish, which divides Palestine from Egypt.\n\n[106] So already in the JE narratives of the Pentateuch.\n\n[107] Lecky: _History of European Morals_, I.\n\n[108] The present writer has already pointed out this with regard to\nEgypt and Ph\u0153nicia in _Isaiah_ (Expositor's Bible Series), I., Chaps.\nXXII. and XXIII., and with regard to Philistia in _Hist. Geog._, p. 178.\n\n[109] I put it this way only for the sake of making the logic\nclear; for it is a mistake to say that the prophets at any time\nheld merely theoretic convictions. All their conviction was really\nexperimental--never held apart from some illustration or proof of\nprinciple in actual history.\n\n[110] \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4: 1 Sam. i. 3; iv. 4; xvii. 45, where it is explained\nby the parallel phrase _God of the armies of Israel_; 2 Sam. vi. 2,\nwhere it is connected with Israel's battle emblem, the Ark (cf. Jer.\nxxii. 18); and so throughout Samuel and Kings, and also Chronicles,\nthe Psalms, and most prophets. The plural \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea is never used in the\nOld Testament except of human hosts, and generally of the armies or\nhosts of Israel. The theory therefore which sees the same meaning\nin the Divine title is probably the correct one. It was first put\nforward by Herder (_Geist der Eb. Poesie_, ii. 84, 85), and after\nsome neglect it has been revived by Kautzsch (_Z. A. T. W._, vi.\nff.) and Stade (_Gesch._, i. 437, _n._ 3). The alternatives are that\nthe hosts originally meant those of heaven, either the angels (so,\namong others, Ewald, _Hist._, Eng. Ed., iii. 62) or the stars (so\nDelitzsch, Kuenen, Baudissin, Cheyne, _Prophecies of Isaiah_, i.\n11). In the former of these two there is some force; but the reason\ngiven for the latter, that the name came to the front in Israel when\nthe people were being drawn into connection with star-worshipping\nnations, especially Aram, seems to me baseless. Israel had not been\nlong in touch with Aram in Saul's time, yet even then the name is\naccepted as if one of much earlier origin. A clear account of the\nargument on the other side to that taken in this note will be found\nin Smend, _Altiestamentliche Religionsgeschichte_, pp. 185 ff.\n\n[111] See below, Chap. XI.\n\n\n\n\n _AMOS_\n\n\n\n\n\"Towers in the distance, like an earth-born Atlas ... such a man in\nsuch a historical position, standing on the confines of light and\ndarkness, like day on the misty mountain-tops.\"\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER V\n\n _THE BOOK OF AMOS_\n\n\nThe genuineness of the bulk of the Book of Amos is not doubted by\nany critic. The only passages suspected as interpolations are the\nthree references to Judah, the three famous outbreaks in praise of\nthe might of Jehovah the Creator, the final prospect of a hope that\ndoes not gleam in any other part of the book, with a few clauses\nalleged to reflect a stage of history later than that in which Amos\nworked.[112] In all, these verses amount to only twenty-six or\ntwenty-seven out of one hundred and forty-six. Each of them can be\ndiscussed separately as we reach it, and we may now pass to consider\nthe general course of the prophecy which is independent of them.\n\nThe Book of Amos consists of Three Groups of Oracles, under one\ntitle, which is evidently meant to cover them all.\n\nThe title runs as follows:--\n\n _Words of 'Amo\u1e63--who was of the herdsmen of Te\u1e33\u00f4a'--which he saw\n concerning Israel in the days of 'Uzziah king of Judah, and in\n the days of Jarab'am son of Joash,_[113] _king of Israel: two\n years before the earthquake._\n\nThe Three Sections, with their contents, are as follows:--\n\n FIRST SECTION: CHAPS. I., II. THE HEATHEN'S\n CRIMES AND ISRAEL'S.\n\n A series of short oracles of the same form, directed impartially\n against the political crimes of all the states of Palestine, and\n culminating in a more detailed denunciation of the social evils\n of Israel, whose doom is foretold, beneath the same flood of war\n as shall overwhelm all her neighbours.\n\n SECOND SECTION: CHAPS. III.-VI. ISRAEL'S\n CRIMES AND DOOM.\n\n A series of various oracles of denunciation, which have no further\n logical connection than is supplied by a general sameness of\n subject, and a perceptible increase of detail and articulateness\n from beginning to end of the section. They are usually grouped\n according to the recurrence of the formula _Hear this word_, which\n stands at the head of our present chaps. iii., iv. and v.; and by\n the two cries of _Woe_ at v. 18 and vi. 1. But even more obvious\n than these commencements are the various climaxes to which they\n lead up. These are all threats of judgment, and each is more\n strenuous or explicit than the one that has preceded it. They\n close with iii. 15, iv. 3, iv. 12, v. 17, v. 27 and vi. 14; and\n according to them the oracles may be conveniently divided into six\n groups.\n\n 1. III. 1-15. After the main theme of judgment is stated in 1, 2,\n we have in 3-8 a parenthesis on the prophet's right to threaten\n doom; after which 9-15, following directly on 2, emphasise the\n social disorder, threaten the land with invasion, the people with\n extinction and the overthrow of their civilisation.\n\n 2. IV. 1-3, beginning with the formula _Hear this word_, is\n directed against women and describes the siege of the capital and\n their captivity.\n\n 3. IV. 4-12, with no opening formula, contrasts the people's\n vain propitiation of God by ritual with His treatment of them\n by various physical chastisements--drought, blight and locusts,\n pestilence, earthquake--and summons them to prepare for another,\n unnamed, visitation. _Jehovah God of Hosts is His Name._\n\n 4. V. 1-17, beginning with the formula _Hear this word_, and\n a dirge over a vision of the nation's defeat, attacks, like\n the previous group, the lavish ritual, sets in contrast to it\n Jehovah's demands for justice and civic purity; and, offering a\n reprieve if Israel will repent, closes with the prospect of an\n universal mourning (vv. 16, 17), which, though introduced by a\n _therefore_, has no logical connection with what precedes it.\n\n 5. V. 18-26 is the first of the two groups that open with _Woe_.\n Affirming that the eagerly expected _Day of Jehovah_ will be\n darkness and disaster on disaster inevitable (18-20), it again\n emphasises Jehovah's desire for righteousness rather than worship\n (21-26), and closes with the threat of captivity beyond Damascus.\n _Jehovah God of Hosts is His Name_, as at the close of 3.\n\n 6. VI. 1-14. The second _Woe_, on them _that are at ease in\n Zion_ (1, 2): a satire on the luxuries of the rich and their\n indifference to the national suffering (3-6): captivity must come,\n with the desolation of the land (9, 10); and in a peroration the\n prophet reiterates a general downfall of the nation because of its\n perversity. _A Nation_--needless to name it!--will oppress Israel\n from Hamath to the River of the Arabah.\n\n THIRD SECTION: CHAPS. VII.-IX. VISIONS WITH\n INTERLUDES.\n\n The Visions betray traces of development; but they are\n interrupted by a piece of narrative and addresses on the same\n themes as chaps. iii.-vi. The FIRST TWO VISIONS (vii. 1-6) are\n of disasters--locusts and drought--in the realm of nature;\n they are averted by prayer from Amos. The THIRD (7-9) is in\n the sphere, not of nature, but history: Jehovah standing with\n a plumbline, as if to show the nation's fabric to be utterly\n twisted, announces that it shall be overthrown, and that the\n dynasty of Jeroboam must be put to the sword. Upon this mention\n of the king, the first in the book, there starts the narrative\n (10-17) of how Amaziah, priest at Bethel--obviously upon hearing\n the prophet's threat--sent word to Jeroboam; and then (whether\n before or after getting a reply) proceeded to silence Amos, who,\n however, reiterates his prediction of doom, again described as\n captivity in a foreign land, and adds a FOURTH VISION (viii.\n 1-3), of the \u1e32aits or _Summer Fruit_, which suggests \u1e32\u00eats, or\n _End_ of the Nation. Here it would seem Amos' discourses at\n Bethel take end. Then comes viii. 4-6, another exposure of the\n sins of the rich; followed by a triple pronouncement of doom\n (7), again in the terms of physical calamities--earthquake (8),\n eclipse (9, 10), and famine (11-14), in the last of which the\n public worship is again attacked. A FIFTH VISION, of the Lord by\n the Altar commanding to smite (ix. 1), is followed by a powerful\n threat of the hopelessness of escape from God's punishment (ix.\n 1_b_-4); the third of the great apostrophes to the might of\n Jehovah (5, 6); another statement of the equality in judgment\n of Israel with other peoples, and of their utter destruction\n (7-8_a_). Then (8_b_) we meet the first qualification of the\n hitherto unrelieved sentence of death. Captivity is described,\n not as doom, but as discipline (9): the sinners of the people,\n scoffers at doom, shall die (10). And this seems to leave room\n for two final oracles of restoration and glory, the only two in\n the book, which are couched in the exact terms of the promises\n of later prophecy (11-15) and are by many denied to Amos.\n\nSuch is the course of the prophesying of Amos. To have traced it must\nhave made clear to us the unity of his book,[114] as well as the\ncharacter of the period to which he belonged. But it also furnishes\nus with a good deal of evidence towards the answer of such necessary\nquestions as these--whether we can fix an exact date for the whole\nor any part, and whether we can trace any logical or historical\ndevelopment through the chapters, either as these now stand, or in\nsome such re-arrangement as we saw to be necessary for the authentic\nprophecies of Isaiah.\n\nLet us take first the simplest of these tasks--to ascertain the\ngeneral period of the book. Twice--by the title and by the portion\nof narrative[115]--we are pointed to the reign of Jeroboam II.,\n_circa_ 783-743; other historical allusions suit the same years. The\nprincipalities of Palestine are all standing, except Gath;[116] but the\ngreat northern cloud which carries their doom has risen and is ready\nto burst. Now Assyria, we have seen, had become fatal to Palestine\nas early as 854. Infrequent invasions of Syria had followed, in one\nof which, in 803, Rimmon Nirari III. had subjected Tyre and Sidon,\nbesieged Damascus, and received tribute from Israel. So far then as the\nAssyrian data are concerned, the Book of Amos might have been written\nearly in the reign of Jeroboam. Even then was the storm lowering as he\ndescribes it. Even then had the lightning broken over Damascus. There\nare other symptoms, however, which demand a later date. They seem\nto imply, not only Uzziah's overthrow of Gath,[117] and Jeroboam's\nconquest of Moab[118] and of Aram,[119] but that establishment of\nIsrael's political influence from Lebanon to the Dead Sea, which must\nhave taken Jeroboam several years to accomplish. With this agree other\nfeatures of the prophecy--the sense of political security in Israel,\nthe large increase of wealth, the ample and luxurious buildings, the\ngorgeous ritual, the easy ability to recover from physical calamities,\nthe consequent carelessness and pride of the upper classes. All these\nthings imply that the last Syrian invasions of Israel in the beginning\nof the century were at least a generation behind the men into whose\ncareless faces the prophet hurled his words of doom. During this\ninterval Assyria had again advanced--in 775, in 773 and in 772.[120]\nNone of these expeditions, however, had come south of Damascus,\nand this, their invariable arrest at some distance from the proper\nterritory of Israel, may have further flattered the people's sense\nof security, though probably the truth was that Jeroboam, like some\nof his predecessors, bought his peace by tribute to the emperor. In\n765, when the Assyrians for the second time invaded Hadrach, in the\nneighbourhood of Damascus, their records mention a pestilence, which,\nboth because their armies were then in Syria, and because the plague\ngenerally spreads over the whole of Western Asia, may well have been\nthe pestilence mentioned by Amos. In 763 a total eclipse of the sun\ntook place, and is perhaps implied by the ninth verse of his eighth\nchapter. If this double allusion to pestilence and eclipse be correct,\nit brings the book down to the middle of the century and the latter\nhalf of Jeroboam's long reign. In 755 the Assyrians came back to\nHadrach; in 754 to Arpad: with these exceptions Syria was untroubled by\nthem till after 745. It was probably these quiet years in which Amos\nfound Israel _at ease in Zion_.[121] If we went down further, within\nthe more forward policy of Tiglath-Pileser, who ascended the throne in\n745 and besieged Arpad from 743 to 740, we should find an occasion for\nthe urgency with which Amos warns Israel that the invasion of her land\nand the overthrow of the dynasty of Jeroboam will be immediate.[122]\nBut Amos might have spoken as urgently even before Tiglath-Pileser's\naccession; and the probability that Hosea, who prophesied within\nJeroboam's reign, quotes from Amos seems to imply that the prophecies\nof the latter had been current for some time.\n\nTowards the middle of the eighth century--is, therefore, the most\ndefinite date to which we are able to assign the Book of Amos. At so\ngreat a distance the difference of a few unmarked years is invisible.\nIt is enough that we know the moral dates--the state of national\nfeeling, the personages alive, the great events which are behind the\nprophet, and the still greater which are imminent. We can see that Amos\nwrote in the political pride of the latter years of Jeroboam's reign,\nafter the pestilence and eclipse of the sixties, and before the advance\nof Tiglath-Pileser in the last forties, of the eighth century.\n\nA particular year is indeed offered by the title of the book, which,\nif not by Amos himself, must be from only a few years later:[123]\n_Words of Amos, which he saw in the days of Uzziah and of Jeroboam,\ntwo years before the earthquake_. This was the great earthquake\nof which other prophets speak as having happened in the days of\nUzziah.[124] But we do not know where to place the year of the\nearthquake, and are as far as ever from a definite date.\n\nThe mention of the earthquake, however, introduces us to the answer\nof another of our questions--whether, with all its unity, the Book\nof Amos reveals any lines of progress, either of event or of idea,\neither historical or logical.\n\nGranting the truth of the title, that Amos had his prophetic eyes\nopened two years before the earthquake, it will be a sign of\nhistorical progress if we find in the book itself any allusions to\nthe earthquake. Now these are present. In the first division we find\nnone, unless the threat of God's visitation in the form of a shaking\nof the land be considered as a tremor communicated to the prophet's\nmind from the recent upheaval. But in the second division there is\nan obvious reference: the last of the unavailing chastisements, with\nwhich Jehovah has chastised His people, is described as a _great\noverturning_.[125] And in the third division, in two passages, the\njudgment, which Amos has already stated will fall in the form of an\ninvasion, is also figured in the terms of an earthquake. Nor does\nthis exhaust the tremors which that awful convulsion had started;\nbut throughout the second and third divisions there is a constant\nsense of instability, of the liftableness and breakableness of the\nvery ground of life. Of course, as we shall see, this was due to the\nprophet's knowledge of the moral explosiveness of society in Israel;\nbut he could hardly have described the results of that in the terms\nhe has used, unless himself and his hearers had recently felt the\nground quake under them, and seen whole cities topple over. If,\nthen, Amos began to prophesy two years before the earthquake, the\nbulk of his book was spoken, or at least written down, after the\nearthquake had left all Israel trembling.[126]\n\nThis proof of progress in the book is confirmed by another feature.\nIn the abstract given above it is easy to see that the judgments\nof the Lord upon Israel were of a twofold character. Some were\nphysical--famine, drought, blight, locusts, earthquake; and some\nwere political--battle, defeat, invasion, captivity. Now it is\nsignificant--and I do not think the point has been previously\nremarked--that not only are the physical represented as happening\nfirst, but that at one time the prophet seems to have understood\nthat no others would be needed, that indeed God did not reveal to\nhim the imminence of political disaster till He had exhausted the\ndiscipline of physical calamities. For this we have double evidence.\nIn chapter iv. Amos reports that the Lord has sought to rouse Israel\nout of the moral lethargy into which their religious services have\nsoothed them, by withholding bread and water; by blighting their\norchards; by a pestilence, a thoroughly Egyptian one; and by an\nearthquake. But these having failed to produce repentance, God must\nvisit the people once more: how, the prophet does not say, leaving\nthe imminent terror unnamed, but we know that the Assyrian overthrow\nis meant. Now precisely parallel to this is the course of the Visions\nin chapter vii. The Lord caused Amos to see (whether in fancy or in\nfact we need not now stop to consider) the plague of locusts. It was\nso bad as to threaten Israel with destruction. But Amos interceded,\nand God answered, _It shall not be_. Similarly with a plague of\ndrought. But then the Vision shifts from the realm of nature to that\nof politics. The Lord sets the plumbline to the fabric of Israel's\nlife: this is found hopelessly bent and unstable. It must be pulled\ndown, and the pulling down shall be political: the family of Jeroboam\nis to be slain, the people are to go into captivity. The next Vision,\ntherefore, is of the End--the Final Judgment of war and defeat, which\nis followed only by Silence.\n\nThus, by a double proof, we see not only that the Divine method in that\nage was to act first by physical chastisement, and only then by an\ninevitable, ultimate doom of war and captivity; but that the experience\nof Amos himself, his own intercourse with the Lord, passed through\nthese two stages. The significance of this for the picture of the\nprophet's life we shall see in our next chapter. Here we are concerned\nto ask whether it gives us any clue as to the extant arrangement of\nhis prophecies, or any justification for re-arranging them, as the\nprophecies of Isaiah have to be re-arranged, according to the various\nstages of historical development at which they were uttered.\n\nWe have just seen that the progress from the physical chastisements\nto the political doom is reflected in both the last two sections of\nthe book. But the same gradual, cumulative method is attributed to the\nDivine Providence by the First Section: _for three transgressions, yea,\nfor four, I will not turn it back_; and then follow the same disasters\nof war and captivity as are threatened in Sections II. and III. But\neach section does not only thus end similarly; each also begins with\nthe record of an immediate impression made on the prophet by Jehovah\n(chaps. i. 2; iii. 3-8; vii. 1-9).\n\nTo sum up:--The Book of Amos consists of three sections,[127]\nwhich seem to have received their present form towards the end of\nJeroboam's reign; and which, after emphasising their origin as\ndue to the immediate influence of Jehovah Himself on the prophet,\nfollow pretty much the same course of the Divine dealings with\nthat generation of Israel--a course which began with physical\nchastisements, that failed to produce repentance, and ended with the\nirrevocable threat of the Assyrian invasion. Each section, that is to\nsay, starts from the same point, follows much the same direction, and\narrives at exactly the same conclusion. Chronologically you cannot\nput one of them before the other; but from each it is possible to\nlearn the stages of experience through which Amos himself passed--to\ndiscover how God taught the prophet, not only by the original\nintuitions from which all prophecy starts, but by the gradual events\nof his day both at home and abroad.\n\nThis decides our plan for us. We shall first trace the life and\nexperience of Amos, as his book enables us to do; and then we shall\nexamine, in the order in which they lie, the three parallel forms in\nwhich, when he was silenced at Bethel, he collected the fruits of\nthat experience, and gave them their final expression.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe style of the book is simple and terse. The fixity of the\nprophet's aim--upon a few moral principles and the doom they\ndemand--keeps his sentences firm and sharp, and sends his paragraphs\nrapidly to their climax. That he sees nature only under moral\nlight renders his poetry austere and occasionally savage. His\nlanguage is very pure. There is no ground for Jerome's charge that\nhe was \"imperitus sermone\": we shall have to notice only a few\nirregularities in spelling, due perhaps to the dialect of the deserts\nin which he passed his life.[128]\n\nThe text of the book is for the most part well-preserved; but there are\na number of evident corruptions. Of the Greek Version the same holds\ngood as we have said in more detail of the Greek of Hosea.[129] It is\nsometimes correct where the Hebrew text is not, sometimes suggestive of\nthe emendations required, and sometimes hopelessly astray.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[112] The full list of suspected passages is this: (1) References\nto Judah--ii. 4, 5; vi. 1, _in Zion_; ix. 11, 12. (2) The three\nOutbreaks of Praise--iv. 13; v. 8, 9; ix. 5, 6. (3) The Final\nHope--ix. 8-15, including vv. 11, 12, already mentioned. (4) Clauses\nalleged to reflect a later stage of history--i. 9-12; v. 1, 2, 15;\nvi. 2, 14. (5) Suspected for incompatibility--viii. 11-13.\n\n[113] So designated to distinguish him from the first Jeroboam, the\nson of Nebat.\n\n[114] Apart from the suspected parentheses already mentioned.\n\n[115] Chap. vii.\n\n[116] And, if vi. 2 be genuine, Hamath.\n\n[117] 2 Chron. xxvi. 6. In the list of the Philistine cities, Amos\ni. 6-8, Gath does not occur, and in harmony with this in vi. 2 it is\nsaid to be overthrown; see pp. 173 f.\n\n[118] 2 Kings. In Amos ii. 3 the ruler of Moab is called, not king, but\n\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05e4\u05d8, or regent, such as Jeroboam substituted for the king of Moab.\n\n[119] According to Gr\u00e4tz's emendation of vi. 13: _we have taken\nLo-Debar and Karnaim_. Perhaps too in iii. 12, though the verse is\nvery obscure, some settlement of Israelites in Damascus is implied.\nFor Jeroboam's conquest of Aram (2 Kings xiv. 28), see p. 177.\n\n[120] In 775 to Erini, \"the country of the cedars\"--that is, Mount\nAmanus, near the Gulf of Antioch; in 773 to Damascus; in 772 to\nHadrach.\n\n[121] vi. 1.\n\n[122] vii. 9.\n\n[123] Even K\u00f6nig denies that the title is from Amos (_Einleitung_,\n307); yet the ground on which he does so, the awkwardness of the\ndouble relative, does not appear sufficient. One does not write a\ntitle in the same style as an ordinary sentence.\n\n[124] Zech. xiv. 5, and probably Isa. ix. 9, 10 (Eng.).\n\n[125] iv. 11.\n\n[126] Of course it is always possible to suspect--and let us by all\nmeans exhaust the possibilities of suspicion--that the title has\nbeen added by a scribe, who interpreted the forebodings of judgment\nwhich Amos expresses in the terms of earthquake as if they were\nthe predictions of a real earthquake, and was anxious to show, by\ninserting the title, how they were fulfilled in the great convulsion\nof Uzziah's days. But to such a suspicion we have a complete answer.\nNo later scribe, who understood the book he was dealing with, would\nhave prefixed to it a title, with the motive just suspected, when\nin chap. iv. he read that an earthquake had just taken place. The\nvery fact that such a title appears over a book, which speaks of the\nearthquake as past, surely attests the _bona fides_ of the title.\nWith that mention in chap. iv. of the earthquake as past, none\nwould have ventured to say that Amos began to prophesy before the\nearthquake unless they had known this to be the case.\n\n[127] Except for the later additions, not by Amos, to be afterwards\nnoted.\n\n[128] Cf. ii. 13; v. 11.; vi. 8, 10; vii. 9, 16; viii. 8 (?).\n\n[129] See below, p. 221.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VI\n\n _THE MAN AND THE PROPHET_\n\n\nThe Book of Amos opens one of the greatest stages in the religious\ndevelopment of mankind. Its originality is due to a few simple ideas,\nwhich it propels into religion with an almost unrelieved abruptness.\nBut, like all ideas which ever broke upon the world, these also have\nflesh and blood behind them. Like every other Reformation, this one\nin Israel began with the conscience and the protest of an individual.\nOur review of the book has made this plain. We have found in it, not\nonly a personal adventure of a heroic kind, but a progressive series\nof visions, with some other proofs of a development both of facts and\nideas. In short, behind the book there beats a life, and our first duty\nis to attempt to trace its spiritual history. The attempt is worth the\ngreatest care. \"Amos,\" says a very critical writer,[130] \"is one of the\nmost wonderful appearances in the history of the human spirit.\"\n\n\n 1. THE MAN AND HIS DISCIPLINE.\n\n AMOS i. 1; iii. 3-8; vii. 14, 15.\n\nWhen charged at the crisis of his career with being but a\nhireling-prophet, Amos disclaimed the official name and took his\nstand upon his work as a man: _No prophet I, nor prophet's son, but\na herdsman and a dresser of sycomores. Jehovah took me from behind\nthe flock._[131] We shall enhance our appreciation of this manhood,\nand of the new order of prophecy which it asserted, if we look for a\nlittle at the soil on which it was so bravely nourished.\n\nSix miles south from Bethlehem, as Bethlehem is six from Jerusalem,\nthere rises on the edge of the Jud\u00e6an plateau, towards the desert, a\ncommanding hill, the ruins on which are still known by the name of\nTe\u1e33\u00f4a'.[132]\n\nIn the time of Amos Tekoa was a place without sanctity and almost\nwithout tradition. The name suggests that the site may at first have\nbeen that of a camp. Its fortification by Rehoboam, and the mission\nof its wise woman to David, are its only previous appearances in\nhistory. Nor had nature been less grudging to it than fame. The men\nof Tekoa looked out upon a desolate and haggard world. South, west\nand north the view is barred by a range of limestone hills, on one\nof which directly north the grey towers of Jerusalem are hardly to\nbe discerned from the grey mountain lines. Eastward the prospect\nis still more desolate, but it is open; the land slopes away for\nnearly eighteen miles to a depth of four thousand feet. Of this\nlong descent, the first step, lying immediately below the hill of\nTekoa, is a shelf of stony moorland with the ruins of vineyards. It\nis the lowest ledge of the settled life of Jud\u00e6a. The eastern edge\ndrops suddenly by broken rocks to slopes spotted with bushes of\n\"retem,\" the broom of the desert, and with patches of poor wheat.\nFrom the foot of the slopes the land rolls away in a maze of low\nhills and shallow dales, that flush green in spring, but for the rest\nof the year are brown with withered grass and scrub. This is the\n_Wilderness_ or _Pastureland of Tekoa_,[133] across which by night\nthe wild beasts howl, and by day the blackened sites of deserted\ncamps, with the loose cairns that mark the nomads' graves, reveal a\nhuman life almost as vagabond and nameless as that of the beasts.\nBeyond the rolling land is Jeshimon, or Devastation--a chaos of\nhills, none of whose ragged crests are tossed as high as the shelf\nof Tekoa, while their flanks shudder down some further thousands of\nfeet, by crumbling precipices and corries choked with debris, to the\ncoast of the Dead Sea. The northern half of this is visible, bright\nblue against the red wall of Moab, and the level top of the wall,\nbroken only by the valley of the Arnon, constitutes the horizon.\nExcept for the blue water--which shines in its gap between the torn\nhills like a bit of sky through rifted clouds--it is a very dreary\nworld. Yet the sun breaks over it, perhaps all the more gloriously;\nmists, rising from the sea simmering in its great vat, drape the\nnakedness of the desert noon; and through the dry desert night the\nplanets ride with a majesty they cannot assume in our more troubled\natmospheres. It is also a very empty and a very silent world, yet\nevery stir of life upon it excites, therefore, the greater vigilance,\nand man's faculties, relieved from the rush and confusion of events,\nform the instinct of marking, and reflecting upon, every single\nphenomenon. And it is a very savage world. Across it all, the towers\nof Jerusalem give the only signal of the spirit, the one token that\nman has a history.\n\nUpon this unmitigated wilderness, where life is reduced to poverty and\ndanger; where nature starves the imagination, but excites the faculties\nof perception and curiosity; with the mountain tops and the sunrise\nin his face, but above all with Jerusalem so near,--Amos did the work\nwhich made him a man, heard the voice of God calling him to be a\nprophet, and gathered those symbols and figures in which his prophet's\nmessage still reaches us with so fresh and so austere an air.\n\nAmos was _among the shepherds of Tekoa_. The word for _shepherd_ is\nunusual, and means the herdsman of a peculiar breed of desert sheep,\nstill under the same name prized in Arabia for the excellence of their\nwool.[134] And he was _a dresser of sycomores_. The tree, which is\nnot our sycamore, is very easily grown in sandy soil with a little\nwater. It reaches a great height and mass of foliage. The fruit is\nlike a small fig, with a sweet but watery taste, and is eaten only by\nthe poor. Born not of the fresh twigs, but of the trunk and older\nbranches, the sluggish lumps are provoked to ripen by pinching or\nbruising, which seems to be the literal meaning of the term that\nAmos uses of himself--_a pincher of sycomores_.[135] The sycomore\ndoes not grow at so high a level as Tekoa;[136] and this fact, taken\nalong with the limitation of the ministry of Amos to the Northern\nKingdom, has been held to prove that he was originally an Ephraimite,\na sycomore-dresser, who had migrated and settled down, as the peculiar\nphrase of the title says, _among the shepherds of Tekoa_.[137] We shall\npresently see, however, that his familiarity with life in Northern\nIsrael may easily have been won in other ways than through citizenship\nin that kingdom; while the very general nature of the definition,\n_among the shepherds of Tekoa_, does not oblige us to place either\nhim or his sycomores so high as the village itself. The most easterly\ntownship of Jud\u00e6a, Tekoa commanded the whole of the wilderness beyond,\nto which indeed it gave its name, _the wilderness of Tekoa_. The\nshepherds of Tekoa were therefore, in all probability, scattered across\nthe whole region down to the oases on the coast of the Dead Sea, which\nhave generally been owned by one or other of the settled communities in\nthe hill-country above, and may at that time have belonged to Tekoa,\njust as in Crusading times they belonged to the monks of Hebron, or are\nto-day cultivated by the Rushaideh Arabs, who pitch their camps not far\nfrom Tekoa itself. As you will still find everywhere on the borders\nof the Syrian desert shepherds nourishing a few fruit-trees round the\nchief well of their pasture, in order to vary their milk diet, so in\nsome low oasis in the wilderness of Jud\u00e6a Amos cultivated the poorest,\nbut the most easily grown of fruits, the sycomore.[138] All this\npushes Amos and his dwarf sheep deeper into the desert, and emphasises\nwhat has been said above, and still remains to be illustrated, of the\ndesert's influence on his discipline as a man and on his speech as a\nprophet. We ought to remember that in the same desert another prophet\nwas bred, who was also the pioneer of a new dispensation, and whose\nministry, both in its strength and its limitations, is much recalled by\nthe ministry of Amos. John the son of Zacharias _grew and waxed strong\nin spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto\nIsrael_.[139] Here, too, our Lord was _with the wild beasts_.[140] How\nmuch Amos had been with them may be seen from many of his metaphors.\n_The lion roareth, who shall not fear?... As when the shepherd rescueth\nfrom the mouth of the lion two shin-bones or a bit of an ear.... It\nshall be as when one is fleeing from a lion, and a bear cometh upon\nhim; and he entereth a house, and leaneth his hand on the wall, and a\nserpent biteth him._\n\nAs a wool-grower, however, Amos must have had his yearly journeys\namong the markets of the land; and to such were probably due his\nopportunities of familiarity with Northern Israel, the originals of\nhis vivid pictures of her town-life, her commerce and the worship\nat her great sanctuaries. One hour westward from Tekoa would bring\nhim to the high-road between Hebron and the North, with its troops\nof pilgrims passing to Beersheba.[141] It was but half-an-hour more\nto the watershed and an open view of the Philistine plain. Bethlehem\nwas only six, Jerusalem twelve miles from Tekoa. Ten miles farther,\nacross the border of Israel, lay Bethel with its temple, seven miles\nfarther Gilgal, and twenty miles farther still Samaria the capital,\nin all but two days' journey from Tekoa. These had markets as well\nas shrines;[142] their annual festivals would be also great fairs.\nIt is certain that Amos visited them; it is even possible that he\nwent to Damascus, in which the Israelites had at the time their own\nquarters for trading. By road and market he would meet with men of\nother lands. Ph\u0153nician pedlars, or Canaanites as they were called,\ncame up to buy the homespun for which the housewives of Israel were\nfamed[143]--hard-faced men who were also willing to purchase slaves,\nand haunted even the battle-fields of their neighbours for this\nsinister purpose. Men of Moab, at the time subject to Israel; Aramean\nhostages; Philistines who held the export trade to Egypt,--these\nAmos must have met and may have talked with; their dialects scarcely\ndiffered from his own. It is no distant, desert echo of life which\nwe hear in his pages, but the thick and noisy rumour of caravan and\nmarket-place: how the plague was marching up from Egypt;[144] ugly\nstories of the Ph\u0153nician slave-trade;[145] rumours of the advance of\nthe awful Power, which men were hardly yet accustomed to name, but\nwhich had already twice broken from the North upon Damascus. Or it\nwas the progress of some national mourning--how lamentation sprang\nup in the capital, rolled along the highways, and was re-echoed\nfrom the husbandmen and vinedressers on the hillsides.[146] Or, at\ncloser quarters, we see and hear the bustle of the great festivals\nand fairs--the _solemn assemblies_, the reeking holocausts, the\n_noise of songs and viols_;[147] the brutish religious zeal kindling\ninto drunkenness and lust on the very steps of the altar;[148] the\nembezzlement of pledges by the priests, the covetous restlessness of\nthe traders, their false measures, their entanglement of the poor\nin debt;[149] the careless luxury of the rich, their _banquets_,\n_buckets of wine_, _ivory couches_, pretentious, preposterous\nmusic.[150] These things are described as by an eyewitness. Amos\nwas not a citizen of the Northern Kingdom, to which he almost\nexclusively refers; but it was because he went up and down in it,\nusing those eyes which the desert air had sharpened, that he so\nthoroughly learned the wickedness of its people, the corruption of\nIsrael's life in every rank and class of society.[151]\n\nBut the convictions which he applied to this life Amos learned at\nhome. They came to him over the desert, and without further material\nsignal than was flashed to Tekoa from the towers of Jerusalem. This\nis placed beyond doubt by the figures in which he describes his call\nfrom Jehovah. Contrast his story, so far as he reveals it, with\nthat of another. Some twenty years later, Isaiah of Jerusalem saw\nthe Lord in the Temple, high and lifted up, and all the inaugural\nvision of this greatest of the prophets was conceived in the figures\nof the Temple--the altar, the smoke, the burning coals. But to his\npredecessor _among the shepherds of Tekoa_, although revelation also\nstarts from Jerusalem, it reaches him, not in the sacraments of her\nsanctuary, but across the bare pastures, and as it were in the roar\nof a lion. _Jehovah from Zion roareth, and uttereth His voice from\nJerusalem._[152] We read of no formal process of consecration for\nthis first of the prophets. Through his clear desert air, the word\nof God breaks upon him without medium or sacrament. And the native\nvigilance of the man is startled, is convinced by it, beyond all\nargument or question. _The lion hath roared, who shall not fear?\nJehovah hath spoken, who can but prophesy?_\n\nThese words are taken from a passage in which Amos illustrates\nprophecy from other instances of his shepherd life. We have seen\nwhat a school of vigilance the desert is. Upon the bare surface all\nthat stirs is ominous. Every shadow, every noise--the shepherd must\nknow what is behind and be warned. Such a vigilance Amos would have\nIsrael apply to his own message, and to the events of their history.\nBoth of these he compares to certain facts of desert life, behind\nwhich his shepherdly instincts have taught him to feel an ominous\ncause. _Do two men walk together except they have trysted?_--except\nthey have made an appointment. Hardly in the desert, for there men\nmeet and take the same road by chance as seldom as ships at sea.\n_Doth a lion roar in the jungle and have no prey, or a young lion\nlet out his voice in his den except he be taking something?_ The\nhunting lion is silent till his quarry be in sight; when the lonely\nshepherd hears the roar across the desert, he knows the lion leaps\nupon his prey, and he shudders as Israel ought to do when they\nhear God's voice by the prophet, for this also is never loosened\nbut for some grim fact, some leap of doom. Or _doth a little bird\nfall on the snare earthwards and there be no noose upon her?_ The\nreading may be doubtful, but the meaning is obvious: no one ever\nsaw a bird pulled roughly down to earth when it tried to fly away\nwithout knowing there was the loop of a snare about her. Or _does the\nsnare itself rise up from the ground, except indeed it be capturing\nsomething?_--except there be in the trap or net something to flutter,\nstruggle and so lift it up. Traps do not move without life in them.\nOr _is the alarum trumpet_[153] _blown in a city_--for instance, in\nhigh Tekoa up there, when some Arab raid sweeps from the desert on\nto the fields--_and do the people not tremble?_ Or _shall calamity\nhappen in a city and Jehovah not have done it? Yea, the Lord Jehovah\ndoeth nothing but He has revealed His purpose to His servants the\nprophets._ My voice of warning and these events of evil in your midst\nhave the same cause--Jehovah--behind them. _The lion hath roared, who\nshall not fear? Jehovah hath spoken, who can but prophesy?_[154]\n\nWe cannot miss the personal note which rings through this triumph\nin the reality of things unseen. Not only does it proclaim a man of\nsincerity and conviction: it is resonant with the discipline by which\nthat conviction was won--were won, too, the freedom from illusion and\nthe power of looking at facts in the face, which Amos alone of his\ncontemporaries possessed.\n\nSt. Bernard has described the first stage of the Vision of God as the\nVision Distributive, in which the eager mind distributes her attention\nupon common things and common duties in themselves. It was in this\nelementary school that the earliest of the new prophets passed his\napprenticeship and received his gifts. Others excel Amos in the powers\nof the imagination and the intellect. But by the incorrupt habits of\nhis shepherd's life, by daily wakefulness to its alarms and daily\nfaithfulness to its opportunities, he was trained in that simple power\nof appreciating facts and causes, which, applied to the great phenomena\nof the spirit and of history, forms his distinction among his peers.\nIn this we find perhaps the reason why he records of himself no solemn\nhour of cleansing and initiation. _Jehovah took me from following the\nflock, and Jehovah said unto me, Go, prophesy unto My people Israel._\nAmos was of them of whom it is written, \"Blessed are those servants\nwhom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching.\" Through all his\nhard life, this shepherd had kept his mind open and his conscience\nquick, so that when the word of God came to him he knew it, as fast\nas he knew the roar of the lion across the moor. Certainly there is\nno habit, which, so much as this of watching facts with a single eye\nand a responsible mind, is indispensable alike in the humblest duties\nand in the highest speculations of life. When Amos gives those na\u00efve\nillustrations of how real the voice of God is to him, we receive them\nas the tokens of a man, honest and awake. Little wonder that he refuses\nto be reckoned among the professional prophets of his day, who found\ntheir inspiration in excitement and trance. Upon him the impulses of\nthe Deity come in no artificial and morbid ecstasy, removed as far as\npossible from real life. They come upon him, as it were, in the open\nair. They appeal to the senses of his healthy and expert manhood.\nThey convince him of their reality with the same force as do the most\nstartling events of his lonely shepherd watches. _The lion hath roared,\nwho shall not fear? Jehovah hath spoken, who can but prophesy?_\n\nThe influence of the same discipline is still visible when Amos\npasses from the facts of his own consciousness to the facts of\nhis people's life. His day in Israel sweltered with optimism. The\nglare of wealth, the fulsome love of country, the rank incense of\na religion that was without morality--these thickened all the air,\nand neither the people nor their rulers had any vision. But Amos\ncarried with him his clear desert atmosphere and his desert eyes. He\nsaw the raw facts: the poverty, the cruel negligence of the rich,\nthe injustice of the rulers, the immorality of the priests. The\nmeaning of these things he questioned with as much persistence as he\nquestioned every suspicious sound or sight upon those pastures of\nTekoa. He had no illusions: he knew a mirage when he saw one. Neither\nthe military pride of the people, fostered by recent successes over\nSyria, nor the dogmas of their religion, which asserted Jehovah's\nswift triumph upon the heathen, could prevent him from knowing that\nthe immorality of Israel meant Israel's political downfall. He was\none of those recruits from common life, by whom religion and the\nstate have at all times been reformed. Springing from the laity and\nvery often from among the working classes, their freedom from dogmas\nand routine, as well as from the compromising interests of wealth,\nrank and party, renders them experts in life to a degree that almost\nno professional priest, statesman or journalist, however honest or\nsympathetic, can hope to rival. Into politics they bring facts, but\ninto religion they bring vision.\n\nIt is of the utmost significance that this reformer, this founder of\nthe highest order of prophecy in Israel, should not only thus begin\nwith facts, but to the very end be occupied with almost nothing\nelse, than the vision and record of them. In Amos there is but one\nprospect of the Ideal. It does not break till the close of his\nbook, and then in such contrast to the plain and final indictments,\nwhich constitute nearly all the rest of his prophesying, that many\nhave not unnaturally denied to him the verses which contain it.\nThroughout the other chapters we have but the exposure of present\nfacts, material and moral, nor the sight of any future more distant\nthan to-morrow and the immediate consequences of to-day's deeds.\nLet us mark this. The new prophecy which Amos started in Israel\nreached Divine heights of hope, unfolded infinite powers of moral\nand political regeneration--dared to blot out all the past, dared to\nbelieve all things possible in the future. But it started from the\ntruth about the moral situation of the present. Its first prophet not\nonly denied every popular dogma and ideal, but appears not to have\nsubstituted for them any others. He spent his gifts of vision on the\ndiscovery and appreciation of facts. Now this is necessary, not only\nin great reformations of religion, but at almost every stage in her\ndevelopment. We are constantly disposed to abuse even the most just\nand necessary of religious ideals as substitutes for experience or\nas escapes from duty, and to boast about the future before we have\nunderstood or mastered the present. Hence the need of realists like\nAmos. Though they are destitute of dogma, of comfort, of hope, of the\nideal, let us not doubt that they also stand in the succession of the\nprophets of the Lord.\n\nNay, this is a stage of prophecy on which may be fulfilled the prayer\nof Moses: _Would to God that all the Lord's people were prophets!_ To\nsee the truth and tell it, to be accurate and brave about the moral\nfacts of our day--to this extent the Vision and the Voice are possible\nfor every one of us. Never for us may the doors of heaven open, as they\ndid for him who stood on the threshold of the earthly temple, and he\nsaw the Lord enthroned, while the Seraphim of the Presence sang the\nglory. Never for us may the skies fill with that tempest of life which\nEzekiel beheld from Shinar, and above it the sapphire throne, and on\nthe throne the likeness of a man, the likeness of the glory of the\nLord. Yet let us remember that to see facts as they are and to tell the\ntruth about them--this also is prophecy. We may inhabit a sphere which\ndoes not prompt the imagination, but is as destitute of the historic\nand traditional as was the wilderness of Tekoa. All the more may our\nunglamoured eyes be true to the facts about us. Every common day leads\nforth her duties as shining as every night leads forth her stars. The\ndeeds and the fortunes of men are in our sight, and spell, to all who\nwill honestly read, the very Word of the Lord. If only we be loyal,\nthen by him who made the rude sounds and sights of the desert his\nsacraments, and whose vigilance of things seen and temporal became the\nvision of things unseen and eternal, we also shall see God, and be sure\nof His ways with men.\n\nBefore we pass from the desert discipline of the prophet, we\nmust notice one of its effects, which, while it greatly enhanced\nthe clearness of his vision, undoubtedly disabled Amos for the\nhighest prophetic rank. He who lives in the desert lives without\npatriotism--detached and aloof. He may see the throng of men more\nclearly than those who move among it. He cannot possibly so much feel\nfor them. Unlike Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiah, Amos was not a citizen\nof the kingdom against which he prophesied, and indeed no proper\ncitizen of any kingdom, but a nomad herdsman, hovering on the desert\nborders of Jud\u00e6a. He saw Israel from the outside. His message to her\nis achieved with scarcely one sob in his voice. For the sake of the\npoor and the oppressed among the people he is indignant. But with the\nerring, staggering nation as a whole he has no real sympathy. His\npity for her is exhausted in one elegy and two brief intercessions;\nhardly more than once does he even call her to repentance. His sense\nof justice, in fact, had almost never to contend with his love. This\nmade Amos the better witness, but the worse prophet. He did not rise\nso high as his great successors, because he did not so feel himself\none with the people whom he was forced to condemn, because he did\nnot bear their fate as his own nor travail for their new birth. \"Ihm\nfehlt die Liebe.\" Love is the element lacking in his prophecy; and\ntherefore the words are true of him, which were uttered of his great\nfollower across this same wilderness of Jud\u00e6a, that mighty as were\nhis voice and his message to prepare the way of the Lord, yet _the\nleast in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he_.\n\n\n 2. THE WORD AND ITS ORIGINS.\n\n AMOS i. 2; iii. 3-8; and _passim_.\n\nWe have seen the preparation of the Man for the Word. We are now\nto ask, Whence came the Word to the Man?--the Word that made him a\nprophet. What were its sources and sanctions outside himself? These\ninvolve other questions. How much of his message did Amos inherit\nfrom the previous religion of his people? And how much did he teach\nfor the first time in Israel? And again, how much of this new element\ndid he owe to the great events of his day? And how much demands some\nother source of inspiration?\n\nTo all these inquiries, outlines of the answers ought by this time to\nhave become visible. We have seen that the contents of the Book of\nAmos consist almost entirely of two kinds: facts, actual or imminent,\nin the history of his people; and certain moral principles of the\nmost elementary order. Amos appeals to no dogma nor form of law, nor\nto any religious or national institution. Still more remarkably, he\ndoes not rely upon miracle nor any so-called \"supernatural sign.\"\nTo employ the terms of Mazzini's famous formula, Amos draws his\nmaterials solely from \"conscience and history.\" Within himself\nhe hears certain moral principles speak in the voice of God, and\ncertain events of his day he recognises as the judicial acts of God.\nThe principles condemn the living generation of Israel as morally\ncorrupt; the events threaten the people with political extinction.\nFrom this agreement between inward conviction and outward event Amos\ndraws his full confidence as a prophet, and enforces on the people\nhis message of doom as God's own word.\n\nThe passage in which Amos most explicitly illustrates this harmony\nbetween event and conviction is one whose metaphors we have already\nquoted in proof of the desert's influence upon the prophet's\nlife. When Amos asks, _Can two walk together except they have\nmade an appointment?_ his figure is drawn, as we have seen, from\nthe wilderness in which two men will hardly meet except they have\narranged to do so; but the truth, he would illustrate by the figure,\nis that two sets of phenomena which coincide must have sprung from\na common purpose. Their conjunction forbids mere chance. What kind\nof phenomena he means, he lets us see in his next instance: _Doth\na lion roar in the jungle and have no prey? Doth a young lion let\nforth his voice from his den except he be catching something?_ That\nis, those ominous sounds never happen without some fell and terrible\ndeed happening along with them. Amos thus plainly hints that the\ntwo phenomena on whose coincidence he insists are an utterance on\none side, and on the other side a deed fraught with destruction.\nThe reading of the next metaphor about the bird and the snare is\nuncertain; at most what it means is that you never see signs of\ndistress or a vain struggle to escape without there being, though\nout of sight, some real cause for them.[155] But from so general\na principle he returns in his fourth metaphor to the special\ncoincidence between utterance and deed. _Is the alarum-trumpet blown\nin a city and do the people not tremble?_ Of course they do; they\nknow such sound is never made without the approach of calamity. But\nwho is the author of every calamity? God Himself: _Shall there be\nevil in a city and Jehovah not have done it?_ Very well then; we have\nseen that common life has many instances in which, when an ominous\nsound is heard, it is because it is closely linked with a fatal deed.\nThese happen together, not by mere chance, but because the one is the\nexpression, the warning or the explanation of the other. And we also\nknow that fatal deeds which happen to any community in Israel are\nfrom Jehovah. He is behind them. But they, too, are accompanied by a\nwarning voice from the same source as themselves. This is the voice\nwhich the prophet hears in his heart--the moral conviction which he\nfeels as the Word of God. _The Lord Jehovah doeth nothing but He\nhath revealed His counsel to His servants the prophets._ Mark the\ngrammar: the revelation comes first to the prophet's heart; then he\nsees and recognises the event, and is confident to give his message\nabout it. So Amos, repeating his metaphor, sums up his argument.\n_The Lion hath roared, who shall not fear?_--certain that there is\nmore than sound to happen. _The Lord Jehovah hath spoken, who can\nbut prophesy?_--certain that what Jehovah has spoken to him inwardly\nis likewise no mere sound, but that deeds of judgment are about to\nhappen, as the ominous voice requires they should.[156]\n\nThe prophet then is made sure of his message by the agreement between\nthe inward convictions of his soul and the outward events of the day.\nWhen these walk together, it proves that they have come of a common\npurpose. He who causes the events--it is Jehovah Himself, _for shall\nthere be evil in a city and Jehovah not have done it?_--must be\nauthor also of the inner voice or conviction which agrees with them.\n_Who_ then _can but prophesy?_ Observe again that no support is here\nderived from miracle; nor is any claim made for the prophet on the\nground of his ability to foretell the event. It is the agreement of\nthe idea with the fact, their evident common origin in the purpose of\nJehovah, which makes a man sure that he has in him the Word of God.\nBoth are necessary, and together are enough. Are we then to leave\nthe origin of the Word in this coincidence of fact and thought--as\nit were an electric flash produced by the contact of conviction with\nevent? Hardly: there are questions behind this coincidence. For\ninstance, as to how the two react on each other--the event provoking\nthe conviction, the conviction interpreting the event? The argument\nof Amos seems to imply that the ethical principles are experienced by\nthe prophet prior to the events which justify them Is this so, or\nwas the shock of the events required to awaken the principles? And\nif the principles were prior, whence did Amos derive them? These are\nsome questions that will lead us to the very origins of revelation.\n\nThe greatest of the events with which Amos and his contemporaries\ndealt was the Assyrian invasion. In a previous chapter we have tried\nto estimate the intellectual effects of Assyria on prophecy.[157]\nAssyria widened the horizon of Israel, put the world to Hebrew\neyes into a new perspective, vastly increased the possibilities\nof history and set to religion a novel order of problems. We can\ntrace the effects upon Israel's conceptions of God, of man and\neven of nature.[158] Now it might be plausibly argued that the new\nprophecy in Israel was first stirred and quickened by all this\nmental shock and strain, and that even the loftier ethics of the\nprophets were thus due to the advance of Assyria. For, as the most\nvigilant watchmen of their day, the prophets observed the rise of\nthat empire, and felt its fatality for Israel. Turning then to\ninquire the Divine reasons for such a destruction, they found these\nin Israel's sinfulness, to the full extent of which their hearts\nwere at last awakened. According to such a theory the prophets were\npoliticians first and moralists afterwards: alarmists to begin with,\nand preachers of repentance only second. Or--to recur to the language\nemployed above--the prophets' experience of the historical event\npreceded their conviction of the moral principle which agreed with it.\n\nIn support of such a theory it is pointed out that after all the\nmost original element in the prophecy of the eighth century was the\nannouncement of Israel's fall and exile. The Righteousness of Jehovah\nhad often previously been enforced in Israel, but never had any voice\ndrawn from it this awful conclusion that the nation must perish. The\nfirst in Israel to dare this was Amos, and surely what enabled him\nto do so was the imminence of Assyria upon his people. Again, such a\ntheory might plausibly point to the opening verse of the Book of Amos,\nwith its unprefaced, unexplained pronouncement of doom upon Israel:--\n\n _The Lord roareth from Zion,_\n _And giveth voice from Jerusalem;_\n _And the pastures of the shepherds mourn,_\n _And the summit of Carmel is withered!_\n\nHere, it might be averred, is the earliest prophet's earliest\nutterance. Is it not audibly the voice of a man in a panic--such a\npanic as, ever on the eve of historic convulsions, seizes the more\nsensitive minds of a doomed people? The distant Assyrian thunder has\nreached Amos, on his pastures, unprepared--unable to articulate its\nexact meaning, and with only faith enough to hear in it the voice of\nhis God. He needs reflection to unfold its contents; and the process\nof this reflection we find through the rest of his book. There he\ndetails for us, with increasing clearness, both the ethical reasons\nand the political results of that Assyrian terror, by which he was at\nfirst so wildly shocked into prophecy.\n\nBut the panic-born are always the still-born; and it is simply\nimpossible that prophecy, in all her ethical and religious vigour, can\nhave been the daughter of so fatal a birth. If we look again at the\nevidence which is quoted from Amos in favour of such a theory, we\nshall see how fully it is contradicted by other features of his book.\n\nTo begin with, we are not certain that the terror of the opening verse\nof Amos is the Assyrian terror. Even if it were, the opening of a book\ndoes not necessarily represent the writer's earliest feelings. The rest\nof the chapters contain visions and oracles which obviously date from\na time when Amos was not yet startled by Assyria, but believed that\nthe punishment which Israel required might be accomplished through a\nseries of physical calamities--locusts, drought and pestilence.[159]\nNay, it was not even these earlier judgments, preceding the Assyrian,\nwhich stirred the word of God in the prophet. He introduces them with\na _now_ and a _therefore_. That is to say, he treats them only as the\nconsequence of certain facts, the conclusion of certain premises. These\nfacts and premises are moral--they are exclusively moral. They are the\nsins of Israel's life, regarded without illusion and without pity. They\nare certain simple convictions, which fill the prophet's heart, about\nthe impossibility of the survival of any state which is so perverse and\nso corrupt.\n\nThis origin of prophecy in moral facts and moral intuitions, which are\nin their beginning independent of political events, may be illustrated\nby several other points. For instance, the sins which Amos marked in\nIsrael were such as required no \"red dawn of judgment\" to expose their\nflagrance and fatality. The abuse of justice, the cruelty of the rich,\nthe shameless immorality of the priests, are not sins which we feel\nonly in the cool of the day, when God Himself draws near to judgment.\nThey are such things as make men shiver in the sunshine. And so the\nBook of Amos, and not less that of Hosea, tremble with the feeling\nthat Israel's social corruption is great enough of itself, without\nthe aid of natural convulsions, to shake the very basis of national\nlife. _Shall not the land tremble for this_, Amos says after reciting\nsome sins, _and every one that dwelleth therein_?[160] Not drought nor\npestilence nor invasion is needed for Israel's doom, but the elemental\nforce of ruin which lies in the people's own wickedness. This is enough\nto create gloom long before the political skies be overcast--or, as\nAmos himself puts it, this is enough\n\n _To cause the sun to go down at noon,_\n _And to darken the earth in the clear day._[161]\n\nAnd once more--in spite of Assyria the ruin may be averted, if only the\npeople will repent: _Seek good and not evil, and Jehovah of hosts will\nbe with you, as you say_.[162] Assyria, however threatening, becomes\nirrelevant to Israel's future from the moment that Israel repents.\n\nSuch beliefs, then, are obviously not the results of experience, nor\nof a keen observation of history. They are the primal convictions\nof the heart, which are deeper than all experience, and themselves\ncontain the sources of historical foresight. With Amos it was not\nthe outward event which inspired the inward conviction, but the\nconviction which anticipated and interpreted the event, though when\nthe event came there can be no doubt that it confirmed, deepened, and\narticulated the conviction.[163]\n\nBut when we have thus tracked the stream of prophecy as far back as\nthese elementary convictions we have not reached the fountain-head.\nWhence did Amos derive his simple and absolute ethics? Were they\noriginal to him? Were they new in Israel? Such questions start an\nargument which touches the very origins of revelation.\n\nIt is obvious that Amos not only takes for granted the laws of\nrighteousness which he enforces: he takes for granted also the\npeople's conscience of them. New, indeed, is the doom which sinful\nIsrael deserves, and original to himself is the proclamation of it;\nbut Amos appeals to the moral principles which justify the doom, as\nif they were not new, and as if Israel ought always to have known\nthem. This attitude of the prophet to his principles has, in our\ntime, suffered a curious judgment. It has been called an anachronism.\nSo absolute a morality, some say, had never before been taught in\nIsrael; nor had righteousness been so exclusively emphasised as the\npurpose of Jehovah. Amos and the other prophets of his century were\nthe virtual \"creators of ethical monotheism\": it could only be by\na prophetic licence or prophetic fiction that he appealed to his\npeople's conscience of the standards he promulgated, or condemned his\ngeneration to death for not having lived up to them.\n\nLet us see how far this criticism is supported by the facts.\n\nTo no sane observer can the religious history of Israel appear\nas anything but a course of gradual development. Even in the\nmoral standards, in respect to which it is confessedly often most\ndifficult to prove growth, the signs of the nation's progress\nare very manifest. Practices come to be forbidden in Israel and\ntempers to be mitigated, which in earlier ages were sanctioned to\ntheir extreme by the explicit decrees of religion. In the nation's\nattitude to the outer world sympathies arise, along with ideals of\nspiritual service, where previously only war and extermination had\nbeen enforced in the name of the Deity. Now in such an evolution it\nis equally indubitable that the longest and most rapid stage was the\nprophecy of the eighth century. The prophets of that time condemn\nacts which had been inspired by their immediate predecessors;[164]\nthey abjure, as impeding morality, a ceremonial which the spiritual\nleaders of earlier generations had felt to be indispensable to\nreligion; and they unfold ideals of the nation's moral destiny, of\nwhich older writings give us only the faintest hints. Yet, while the\nfact of a religious evolution in Israel is thus certain, we must not\nfall into the vulgar error which interprets evolution as if it were\nmere addition, nor forget that even in the most creative periods\nof religion nothing is brought forth which has not already been\npromised, and, at some earlier stage, placed, so to speak, within\nreach of the human mind. After all it is the mind which grows; the\nmoral ideals which become visible to its more matured vision are so\nDivine that, when they present themselves, the mind cannot but think\nthey were always real and always imperative. If we remember these\ncommonplaces we shall do justice both to Amos and to his critics.\n\nIn the first place it is clear that most of the morality which Amos\nenforced is of that fundamental order which can never have been\nrecognised as the discovery or invention of any prophet. Whatever\nbe their origin, the conscience of justice, the duty of kindness to\nthe poor, the horror of wanton cruelty towards one's enemies, which\nform the chief principles of Amos, are discernible in man as far back\nas history allows us to search for them. Should a generation have\nlost them, they can be brought back to it, never with the thrill\nof a new lesson, but only with the shame of an old and an abused\nmemory. To neither man nor people can the righteousness which Amos\npreached appear as a discovery, but always as a recollection and a\nremorse. And this is most emphatically true of the people of Moses\nand of Samuel, of Nathan, of Elijah and of the Book of the Covenant.\nEthical elements had been characteristic of Israel's religion from\nthe very first. They were not due to a body of written law, but\nrather to the character of Israel's God, appreciated by the nation\nin all the great crises of their history.[165] Jehovah had won for\nIsrael freedom and unity. He had been a spirit of justice to their\nlawgivers and magistrates.[166] He had raised up a succession of\nconsecrated personalities,[167] who by life and word had purified\nthe ideals of the whole people. The results had appeared in the\ncreation of a strong national conscience, which avenged with horror,\nas _folly in Israel_, the wanton crimes of any person or section of\nthe commonwealth; in the gradual formation of a legal code, founded\nindeed in the common custom of the Semites, but greatly more\nmoral than that; and even in the attainment of certain profoundly\nethical beliefs about God and His relations, beyond Israel, to all\nmankind. Now, let us understand once for all, that in the ethics of\nAmos there is nothing which is not rooted in one or other of these\nachievements of the previous religion of his people. To this religion\nAmos felt himself attached in the closest possible way. The word of\nGod comes to him across the desert, as we have seen, yet not out\nof the air. From the first he hears it rise from that one monument\nof his people's past which we have found visible on his physical\nhorizon[168]--_from Zion_, _from Jerusalem_,[169] from the city of\nDavid, from the Ark, whose ministers were Moses and Samuel, from the\nrepository of the main tradition of Israel's religion.[170] Amos\nfelt himself in the sacred succession; and his feeling is confirmed\nby the contents of his book. The details of that civic justice\nwhich he demands from his generation are found in the Book of the\nCovenant--the only one of Israel's great codes which appears by this\ntime to have been in existence;[171] or in those popular proverbs\nwhich almost as certainly were found in early Israel.[172]\n\nNor does Amos go elsewhere for the religious sanctions of his\nethics. It is by the ancient mercies of God towards Israel that he\nshames and convicts his generation--by the deeds of grace which made\nthem a nation, by the organs of doctrine and reproof which have\ninspired them, unfailing from age to age. _I destroyed the Amorite\nbefore them.... Yea, I brought you up out of the land of Egypt, and\nI led you forty years in the wilderness, to possess the land of the\nAmorites. And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your\nyoung men for Nazirites. Was it not even thus, O ye children of\nIsrael? saith Jehovah._[173] We cannot even say that the belief which\nAmos expresses in Jehovah as the supreme Providence of the world[174]\nwas a new thing in Israel, for a belief as universal inspires those\nportions of the Book of Genesis which, like the Book of the Covenant,\nwere already extant.\n\nWe see, therefore, what right Amos had to present his ethical truths\nto Israel, as if they were not new, but had been within reach of his\npeople from of old.\n\nWe could not, however, commit a greater mistake, than to confine the\ninspiration of our prophet to the past, and interpret his doctrines as\nmere inferences from the earlier religious ideas of Israel--inferences\nforced by his own passionate logic, or more naturally ripened for him\nby the progress of events. A recent writer has thus summarised the\nwork of the prophets of the eighth century: \"In fact they laid hold\nupon that bias towards the ethical, which dwelt in Jahwism from Moses\nonwards, and they allowed it alone to have value as corresponding to\nthe true religion of Jehovah.\"[175] But this is too abstract to be an\nadequate statement of the prophets' own consciousness. What overcame\nAmos was a Personal Influence--the Impression of a Character; and it\nwas this not only as it was revealed in the past of his people. The God\nwho stands behind Amos is indeed the ancient Deity of Israel, and the\nfacts which prove Him God are those which made the nation--the Exodus,\nthe guidance through the wilderness, the overthrow of the Amorites,\nthe gift of the land. _Was it not even thus, O ye children of Israel?_\nBut what beats and burns through the pages of Amos is not the memory\nof those wonderful works, so much as a fresh vision and understanding\nof the Living God who worked them. Amos has himself met with Jehovah\non the conditions of his own time--on the moral situation provided\nby the living generation of Israel. By an intercourse conducted, not\nthrough the distant signals of the past, but here and now, through the\nevents of the prophet's own day, Amos has received an original and\noverpowering conviction of his people's God as absolute righteousness.\nWhat prophecy had hitherto felt in part, and applied to one or other\nof the departments of Israel's life, Amos is the first to feel in its\nfulness, and to every extreme of its consequences upon the worship,\nthe conduct and the fortunes of the nation. To him Jehovah not only\ncommands this and that righteous law, but Jehovah and righteousness are\nabsolutely identical. _Seek Jehovah and ye shall live ... seek good\nand ye shall live._[176] The absoluteness with which Amos conceived\nthis principle, the courage with which he applied it, carry him along\nthose two great lines upon which we most clearly trace his originality\nas a prophet. In the strength of this principle he does what is really\nnew in Israel: he discards the two elements which had hitherto existed\nalongside the ethical, and had fettered and warped it.\n\nUp till now the ethical spirit of the religion of Jehovah[177] had\nto struggle with two beliefs which we can trace back to the Semitic\norigins of the religion--the belief, namely, that, as the national God,\nJehovah would always defend their political interests, irrespective\nof morality; and the belief that a ceremonial of rites and sacrifices\nwas indispensable to religion. These principles were mutual: as the\ndeity was bound to succour the people, so were the people bound to\nsupply the deity with gifts, and the more of these they brought the\nmore they made sure of his favours. Such views were not absolutely\ndevoid of moral benefit. In the formative period of the nation they had\ncontributed both discipline and hope. But of late they had between them\nengrossed men's hearts, and crushed out of religion both conscience and\ncommon-sense. By the first of them, the belief in Jehovah's predestined\nprotection of Israel, the people's eyes were so holden they could\nnot see how threatening were the times; by the other, the confidence\nin ceremonial, conscience was dulled, and that immorality permitted\nwhich they mingled so shamelessly with their religious zeal. Now the\nconscience of Amos did not merely protest against the predominance of\nthe two, but was so exclusive, so spiritual, that it boldly banished\nboth from religion. Amos denied that Jehovah was bound to save His\npeople; he affirmed that ritual and sacrifice were no part of the\nservice He demands from men. This is the measure of originality in our\nprophet. The two religious principles which were inherent in the very\nfibre of Semitic religion, and which till now had gone unchallenged\nin Israel, Amos cast forth from religion in the name of a pure and\nabsolute righteousness. On the one hand, Jehovah's peculiar connection\nwith Israel meant no more than jealousy for their holiness: _You only\nhave I known of all the families of the earth, therefore will I visit\nupon you all your iniquities._[178] And, on the other hand, all their\nceremonial was abhorrent to Him: _I hate, I despise your festivals....\nThough ye offer Me burnt offerings and your meal offerings, I will not\naccept them.... Take thou away from Me the noise of thy songs; I will\nnot hear the music of thy viols. But let justice run down as waters,\nand righteousness as a perennial stream._[179]\n\nIt has just been said that emphasis upon morality as the sum of\nreligion, to the exclusion of sacrifice, is the most original element\nin the prophecies of Amos. He himself, however, does not regard\nthis as proclaimed for the first time in Israel, and the precedent\nhe quotes is so illustrative of the sources of his inspiration that\nwe do well to look at it for a little. In the verse next to the one\nlast quoted he reports these words of God: _Did ye offer unto Me\nsacrifices and gifts in the wilderness, for forty years, O house of\nIsrael?_ An extraordinary challenge! From the present blind routine\nof sacrifice Jehovah appeals to the beginning of His relations with\nthe nation: did they then perform such services to Him? Of course, a\nnegative answer is expected. No other agrees with the main contention\nof the passage. In the wilderness Israel had not offered sacrifices\nand gifts to Jehovah. Jeremiah quotes a still more explicit word of\nJehovah: _I spake not unto your fathers in the day that I brought\nthem out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings and\nsacrifices: but this thing I commanded them, saying, Obey My voice,\nand I will be your God, and ye shall be My people._[180]\n\nTo these Divine statements we shall not be able to do justice if\nwe hold by the traditional view that the Levitical legislation was\nproclaimed in the wilderness. Discount that legislation, and the\nstatements become clear. It is true, of course, that Israel must\nhave had a ritual of some kind from the first; and that both in the\nwilderness and in Canaan their spiritual leaders must have performed\nsacrifices as if these were acceptable to Jehovah. But even so the\nDivine words which Amos and Jeremiah quote are historically correct;\nfor while the ethical contents of the religion of Jehovah were its\noriginal and essential contents--_I commanded them, saying, Obey\nMy voice_--the ritual was but a modification of the ritual common\nto all Semites; and ever since the occupation of the land, it had,\nthrough the infection of the Canaanite rites on the high places,\ngrown more and more Pagan, both in its functions and in the ideas\nwhich these were supposed to express.[181] Amos was right. Sacrifice\nhad never been the Divine, the revealed element in the religion of\nJehovah. Nevertheless, before Amos no prophet in Israel appears to\nhave said so. And what enabled this man in the eighth century to\noffer testimony, so novel but so true, about the far-away beginnings\nof his people's religion in the fourteenth, was plainly neither\ntradition nor historical research, but an overwhelming conviction\nof the spiritual and moral character of God--of Him who had been\nIsrael's God both then and now, and whose righteousness had been,\njust as much then as now, exalted above all purely national interests\nand all susceptibility to ritual. When we thus see the prophet's\nknowledge of the Living God enabling him, not only to proclaim an\nideal of religion more spiritual than Israel had yet dreamed, but\nto perceive that such an ideal had been the essence of the religion\nof Jehovah from the first, we understand how thoroughly Amos was\nmastered by that knowledge. If we need any further proof of his\n\"possession\" by the character of God, we find it in those phrases\nin which his own consciousness disappears, and we have no longer\nthe herald's report of the Lord's words, but the very accents of\nthe Lord Himself, fraught with personal feeling of the most intense\nquality. _I_ Jehovah _hate, I despise your feast days.... Take thou\naway from Me the noise of thy songs; I will not hear the music of\nthy viols._[182]... _I abhor the arrogance of Jacob, and hate his\npalaces._[183]... _The eyes of the Lord Jehovah are upon the sinful\nkingdom._[184]... _Jehovah sweareth, I will never forget any of\ntheir works._[185] Such sentences reveal a Deity who is not only\nmanifest Character, but surgent and importunate Feeling. We have\ntraced the prophet's word to its ultimate source. It springs from\nthe righteousness, the vigilance, the urgency of the Eternal. The\nintellect, imagination and heart of Amos--the convictions he has\ninherited from his people's past, his conscience of their evil life\nto-day, his impressions of current and coming history--are all\nenforced and illuminated, all made impetuous and radiant, by the\nSpirit, that is to say the Purpose and the Energy, of the Living God.\nTherefore, as he says in the title of his book, or as some one says\nfor him, Amos _saw_ his words. They stood out objective to himself.\nAnd they were not mere sound. They glowed and burned with God.\n\nWhen we realise this, we feel how inadequate it is to express\nprophecy in the terms of evolution. No doubt, as we have seen,\nthe ethics and religion of Amos represent a large and measurable\nadvance upon those of earlier Israel. And yet with Amos we do\nnot seem so much to have arrived at a new stage in a Process, as\nto have penetrated to the Idea which has been behind the Process\nfrom the beginning. The change and growth of Israel's religion are\nrealities--their fruits can be seen, defined, catalogued--but a\ngreater reality is the unseen Purpose which impels them. They have\nbeen expressed only now. He has been unchanging from old and for\never--from the first absolute righteousness in Himself, and absolute\nrighteousness in His demands from men.\n\n\n 3. THE PROPHET AND HIS MINISTRY.\n\n AMOS vii., viii. 1-4.\n\nWe have seen the preparation of the Man for the Word; we have sought\nto trace to its source the Word which came to the Man. It now remains\nfor us to follow the Prophet, Man and Word combined, upon his\nMinistry to the people.\n\nFor reasons given in a previous chapter,[186] there must always be\nsome doubt as to the actual course of the ministry of Amos before\nhis appearance at Bethel. Most authorities, however, agree that\nthe visions recounted in the beginning of the seventh chapter form\nthe substance of his address at Bethel, which was interrupted by\nthe priest Amaziah. These visions furnish a probable summary of\nthe prophet's experience up to that point. While they follow the\nsame course, which we trace in the two series of oracles that now\nprecede them in the book, the ideas in them are less elaborate. At\nthe same time it is evident that Amos must have already spoken upon\nother points than those which he puts into the first three visions.\nFor instance, Amaziah reports to the king that Amos had explicitly\npredicted the exile of the whole people[187]--a conviction which,\nas we have seen, the prophet reached only after some length of\nexperience. It is equally certain that Amos must have already exposed\nthe sins of the people in the light of the Divine righteousness. Some\nof the sections of the book which deal with this subject appear to\nhave been originally spoken; and it is unnatural to suppose that the\nprophet announced the chastisements of God without having previously\njustified these to the consciences of men.\n\nIf this view be correct, Amos, having preached for some time to\nIsrael concerning the evil state of society, appeared at a great\nreligious festival in Bethel, determined to bring matters to a\ncrisis, and to announce the doom which his preaching threatened and\nthe people's continued impenitence made inevitable. Mark his choice\nof place and of audience. It was no mere king he aimed at. Nathan had\ndealt with David, Gad with Solomon, Elijah with Ahab and Jezebel.\nBut Amos sought the people, them with whom resided the real forces\nand responsibilities of life: the wealth, the social fashions,\nthe treatment of the poor, the spirit of worship, the ideals of\nreligion.[188] And Amos sought the people upon what was not only a\ngreat popular occasion, but one on which was arrayed, in all pomp and\nlavishness, the very system he essayed to overthrow. The religion\nof his time--religion as mere ritual and sacrifice--was what God\nhad sent him to beat down, and he faced it at its headquarters, and\nupon one of its high days, in the royal and popular sanctuary where\nit enjoyed at once the patronage of the crown, the lavish gifts of\nthe rich and the thronged devotion of the multitude. As Savonarola\nat the Duomo in Florence, as Luther at the Diet of Worms, as our\nLord Himself at the feast in Jerusalem, so was Amos at the feast in\nBethel. Perhaps he was still more lonely. He speaks nowhere of having\nmade a disciple, and in the sea of faces which turned on him when\nhe spoke, it is probable that he could not welcome a single ally.\nThey were officials, or interested traders, or devotees; he was a\nforeigner and a wild man, with a word that spared the popular dogma\nas little as the royal prerogative. Well for him was it that over\nall those serried ranks of authority, those fanatic crowds, that\nlavish splendour, another vision commanded his eyes. _I saw the Lord\nstanding over the altar, and He said, Smite._\n\nAmos told the pilgrims at Bethel that the first events of his time in\nwhich he felt a purpose of God in harmony with his convictions about\nIsrael's need of punishment were certain calamities of a physical kind.\nOf these, which in chapter iv. he describes as successively drought,\nblasting, locusts, pestilence and earthquake, he selected at Bethel\nonly two--locusts and drought--and he began with the locusts. It may\nhave been either the same visitation as he specifies in chapter iv.,\nor a previous one; for of all the plagues of Palestine locusts have\nbeen the most frequent, occurring every six or seven years. _Thus the\nLord Jehovah caused me to see: and, behold, a brood_[189] _of locusts\nat the beginning of the coming up of the spring crops._ In the Syrian\nyear there are practically two tides of verdure: one which starts after\nthe early rains of October and continues through the winter, checked\nby the cold; and one which comes away with greater force under the\ninfluence of the latter rains and more genial airs of spring.[190] Of\nthese it was the later and richer which the locusts had attacked. _And,\nbehold, it was after the king's mowings._ These seem to have been a\ntribute which the kings of Israel levied on the spring herbage, and\nwhich the Roman governors of Syria used annually to impose in the month\nNisan.[191] _After the king's mowings_ would be a phrase to mark the\ntime when everybody else might turn to reap their green stuff. It was\nthus the very crisis of the year when the locusts appeared; the April\ncrops devoured, there was no hope of further fodder till December.\nStill, the calamity had happened before, and had been survived; a\nnation so vigorous and wealthy as Israel was under Jeroboam II. need\nnot have been frightened to death. But Amos felt it with a conscience.\nTo him it was the beginning of that destruction of his people which\nthe spirit within him knew that their sin had earned. So _it came to\npass, when_ the locusts _had made an end of devouring the verdure of\nthe earth, that I said, Remit, I pray Thee,_ or _pardon_--a proof that\nthere already weighed on the prophet's spirit something more awful than\nloss of grass--_how shall Jacob rise again? for he is little_.[192]\nThe prayer was heard. _Jehovah repented for this: It shall not be,\nsaid Jehovah._ The unnameable _it_ must be the same as in the frequent\nphrase of the first chapter: _I will not turn It back_--namely, the\nfinal execution of doom on the people's sin. The reserve with which\nthis is mentioned, both while there is still chance for the people to\nrepent and after it has become irrevocable, is very impressive.\n\nThe next example which Amos gave at Bethel of his permitted insight\ninto God's purpose was a great drought. _Thus the Lord Jehovah made\nme to see: and, behold, the Lord Jehovah was calling fire into the\nquarrel._[193] There was, then, already a quarrel between Jehovah\nand His people--another sign that the prophet's moral conviction of\nIsrael's sin preceded the rise of the events in which he recognised\nits punishment. _And_ the fire _devoured the Great Deep, yea, it was\nabout to devour the land_.[194] Severe drought in Palestine might well\nbe described as fire, even when it was not accompanied by the flame\nand smoke of those forest and prairie fires which Joel describes as\nits consequences.[195] But to have the full fear of such a drought, we\nshould need to feel beneath us the curious world which the men of those\ndays felt. To them the earth rested in a great deep, from whose stores\nall her springs and fountains burst. When these failed it meant that\nthe unfathomed floods below were burnt up. But how fierce the flame\nthat could effect this! And how certainly able to devour next the solid\nland which rested above the deep--the very _Portion_[196] assigned by\nGod to His people. Again Amos interceded: _Lord Jehovah, I pray Thee\nforbear: how shall Jacob rise? for he is little._ And for the second\ntime Jacob was reprieved. _Jehovah repented for this: It also shall not\ncome to pass, said the Lord Jehovah._\n\nWe have treated these visions, not as the imagination or prospect of\npossible disasters,[197] but as insight into the meaning of actual\nplagues. Such a treatment is justified, not only by the invariable\nhabit of Amos to deal with real facts, but also by the occurrence of\nthese same plagues among the series by which, as we are told, God had\nalready sought to move the people to repentance.[198] The general\nquestion of sympathy between such purely physical disasters and the\nmoral evil of a people we may postpone to another chapter, confining\nourselves here to the part played in the events by the prophet himself.\n\nSurely there is something wonderful in the attitude of this shepherd\nto the fires and plagues that Nature sweeps upon his land. He is\nready for them. And he is ready not only by the general feeling of\nhis time that such things happen of the wrath of God. His sovereign\nand predictive conscience recognises them as her ministers. They\nare sent to punish a people whom she has already condemned. Yet,\nunlike Elijah, Amos does not summon the drought, nor even welcome\nits arrival. How far has prophecy travelled since the violent\nTishbite! With all his conscience of Israel's sin, Amos yet prays\nthat their doom may be turned. We have here some evidence of the\nstruggle through which these later prophets passed, before they\naccepted their awful messages to men. Even Amos, desert-bred and\nliving aloof from Israel, shrank from the judgment which it was his\ncall to publish. For two moments--they would appear to be the only\ntwo in his ministry--his heart contended with his conscience, and\ntwice he entreated God to forgive. At Bethel he told the people all\nthis, in order to show how unwillingly he took up his duty against\nthem, and how inevitable he found that duty to be. But still more\nshall we learn from his tale, if we feel in his words about the\nsmallness of Jacob, not pity only, but sympathy. We shall learn that\nprophets are never made solely by the bare word of God, but that even\nthe most objective and judicial of them has to earn his title to\nproclaim judgment by suffering with men the agony of the judgment he\nproclaims. Never to a people came there a true prophet who had not\nfirst prayed for them. To have entreated for men, to have represented\nthem in the highest courts of Being, is to have deserved also supreme\njudicial rights upon them. And thus it is that our Judge at the Last\nDay shall be none other than our great Advocate who continually\nmaketh intercession for us. It is prayer, let us repeat, which, while\nit gives us all power with God, endows us at the same time with moral\nrights over men. Upon his mission of judgment we shall follow Amos\nwith the greater sympathy that he thus comes forth to it from the\nmercy-seat and the ministry of intercession.\n\nThe first two visions which Amos told at Bethel were of disasters in\nthe sphere of nature, but his third lay in the sphere of politics.\nThe two former were, in their completeness at least, averted; and\nthe language Amos used of them seems to imply that he had not even\nthen faced the possibility of a final overthrow. He took for granted\n_Jacob_ was _to rise again_: he only feared as to _how_ this should\nbe. But the third vision is so final that the prophet does not even\ntry to intercede. Israel is measured, found wanting and doomed.\nAssyria is not named, but is obviously intended; and the fact that\nthe prophet arrives at certainty with regard to the doom of Israel,\njust when he thus comes within sight of Assyria, is instructive as to\nthe influence exerted on prophecy by the rise of that empire.[199]\n\n_Thus He gave me to see: and, behold, the Lord had taken His\nstation_--'tis a more solemn word than the _stood_ of our\nversions--_upon a city wall_ built to _the plummet,_[200] _and in\nHis hand a plummet. And Jehovah said unto me, What art thou seeing,\nAmos?_ The question surely betrays some astonishment shown by the\nprophet at the vision or some difficulty he felt in making it out.\nHe evidently does not feel it at once, as the natural result of his\nown thinking: it is objective and strange to him; he needs time to\nsee into it. _And I said, A plummet. And the Lord said, Behold, I\nam setting a plummet in the midst of My people Israel. I will not\nagain pass them over._ To set a measuring line or a line with weights\nattached to any building means to devote it to destruction;[201]\nbut here it is uncertain whether the plummet threatens destruction,\nor means that Jehovah will at last clearly prove to the prophet the\ninsufferable obliquity of the fabric of the nation's life, originally\nset straight by Himself--originally _a wall of a plummet_. For God's\njudgments are never arbitrary: by a standard we men can read He shows\nus their necessity. Conscience itself is no mere voice of authority:\nit is a convincing plummet, and plainly lets us see _why_ we should\nbe punished. But whichever interpretation we choose, the result is\nthe same. _The high places of Israel shall be desolate, and the\nsanctuaries of Isaac laid waste; and I will rise against the house\nof Jeroboam with the sword._ A declaration of war! Israel is to be\ninvaded, her dynasty overthrown. Every one who heard the prophet\nwould know, though he named them not, that the Assyrians were meant.\n\nIt was apparently at this point that Amos was interrupted by Amaziah.\nThe priest, who was conscious of no spiritual power with which to\noppose the prophet, gladly grasped the opportunity afforded him by\nthe mention of the king, and fell back on the invariable resource of\na barren and envious sacerdotalism: _He speaketh against C\u00e6sar._[202]\nThere follows one of the great scenes of history--the scene which,\nhowever fast the ages and the languages, the ideals and the deities\nmay change, repeats itself with the same two actors. Priest and Man\nface each other--Priest with King behind, Man with God--and wage\nthat debate in which the whole warfare and progress of religion\nconsist. But the story is only typical by being real. Many subtle\ntraits of human nature prove that we have here an exact narrative\nof fact. Take Amaziah's report to Jeroboam. He gives to the words\nof the prophet just that exaggeration and innuendo which betray the\nwily courtier, who knows how to accentuate a general denunciation\ntill it feels like a personal attack. And yet, like every Caiaphas\nof his tribe, the priest in his exaggerations expresses a deeper\nmeaning than he is conscious of. _Amos_--note how the mere mention\nof the name without description proves that the prophet was already\nknown in Israel, perhaps was one on whom the authorities had\nlong kept their eye--_Amos hath conspired against thee_--yet God\nwas his only fellow-conspirator!--_in the midst of the house of\nIsrael_--this royal temple at Bethel. _The land is not able to hold\nhis words_--it must burst; yes, but in another sense than thou\nmeanest, O Caiaphas-Amaziah! _For thus hath Amos said, By the sword\nshall Jeroboam die_--Amos had spoken only of the dynasty, but the\ntwist which Amaziah lends to the words is calculated--_and Israel\ngoing shall go into captivity from off his own land_. This was the\none unvarnished spot in the report.\n\nHaving fortified himself, as little men will do, by his duty to\nthe powers that be, Amaziah dares to turn upon the prophet; and he\ndoes so, it is amusing to observe, with that tone of intellectual\nand moral superiority which it is extraordinary to see some men\nderive from a merely official station or touch with royalty.\n_Visionary,_[203] _begone! Get thee off to the land of Judah;\nand earn_[204] _thy bread there, and there play the prophet. But\nat Bethel_--mark the rising accent of the voice--_thou shalt not\nagain prophesy. The King's Sanctuary it is, and the House of the\nKingdom._[205] With the official mind this is more conclusive than\nthat it is the House of God! In fact the speech of Amaziah justifies\nthe hardest terms which Amos uses of the religion of his day. In all\nthis priest says there is no trace of the spiritual--only fear, pride\nand privilege. Divine truth is challenged by human law, and the Word\nof God silenced in the name of the king.\n\nWe have here a conception of religion, which is not merely due to\nthe unspiritual character of the priest who utters it, but has its\nroots in the far back origins of Israel's religion. The Pagan Semite\nidentified absolutely State and Church; and on that identification\nwas based the religious practice of early Israel. It had many healthy\nresults: it kept religion in touch with public life; order, justice,\npatriotism, self-sacrifice for the common weal, were devoutly held\nto be matters of religion. So long, therefore, as the system was\ninspired by truly spiritual ideals, nothing for those times could be\nbetter. But we see in it an almost inevitable tendency to harden to\nthe sheerest officialism. That it was more apt to do so in Israel\nthan in Judah, is intelligible from the political origin of the\nNorthern Schism, and the erection of the national sanctuaries from\nmotives of mere statecraft.[206] Erastianism could hardly be more\nflagrant or more ludicrous in its opposition to true religion than at\nBethel. And yet how often have the ludicrousness and the flagrancy\nbeen repeated, with far less temptation! Ever since Christianity\nbecame a state religion, she that needed least to use the weapons of\nthis world has done so again and again in a thoroughly Pagan fashion.\nThe attempts of Churches by law established, to stamp out by law all\nreligious dissent; or where such attempts were no longer possible,\nthe charges now of fanaticism and now of sordidness and religious\nshopkeeping, which have been so frequently made against dissent by\nlittle men who fancied their state connection, or their higher social\nposition, to mean an intellectual and moral superiority; the absurd\nclaims which many a minister of religion makes upon the homes and\nthe souls of a parish, by virtue not of his calling in Christ, but\nof his position as official priest of the parish,--all these are the\nsins of Amaziah, priest of Bethel. But they are not confined to\nan established Church. The Amaziahs of dissent are also very many.\nWherever the official masters the spiritual; wherever mere dogma or\ntradition is made the standard of preaching; wherever new doctrine is\nsilenced, or programmes of reform condemned, as of late years in Free\nChurches they have sometimes been, not by spiritual argument, but\nby the _ipse dixit_ of the dogmatist, or by ecclesiastical rule or\nexpediency,--there you have the same spirit. The dissenter who checks\nthe Word of God in the name of some denominational law or dogma is\nas Erastian as the churchman who would crush it, like Amaziah, by\ninvoking the state. These things in all the Churches are the beggarly\nrudiments of Paganism; and religious reform is achieved, as it was\nthat day at Bethel, by the abjuring of officialism.\n\n_But Amos answered and said unto Amaziah, No prophet I, nor prophet's\nson. But a herdsman_[207] _I, and a dresser of sycomores; and Jehovah\ntook me from behind the flock, and Jehovah said unto me, Go, prophesy\nunto My people Israel._\n\nOn such words we do not comment; we give them homage. The answer\nof this shepherd to this priest is no mere claim of personal\ndisinterestedness. It is the protest of a new order of prophecy,[208]\nthe charter of a spiritual religion. As we have seen, the _sons of the\nprophets_ were guilds of men who had taken to prophesying because of\ncertain gifts of temper and natural disposition, and they earned their\nbread by the exercise of these. Among such abstract craftsmen Amos\nwill not be reckoned. He is a prophet, but not of the kind with which\nhis generation was familiar. An ordinary member of society, he has been\nsuddenly called by Jehovah from his civil occupation for a special\npurpose and by a call which has not necessarily to do with either gifts\nor a profession. This was something new, not only in itself, but in\nits consequences upon the general relations of God to men. What we see\nin this dialogue at Bethel is, therefore, not merely the triumph of a\ncharacter, however heroic, but rather a step forward--and that one of\nthe greatest and most indispensable--in the history of religion.\n\nThere follows a denunciation of the man who sought to silence this\nfresh voice of God. _Now therefore hearken to the word of Jehovah\nthou that sayest, Prophesy not against Israel, nor let drop thy words\nagainst the house of Israel; therefore thus saith Jehovah...._ Thou\nhast presumed to say; _Hear what God will say_. Thou hast dared to\nset thine office and system against His word and purpose. See how\nthey must be swept away. In defiance of its own rules the grammar\nflings forward to the beginnings of its clauses, each detail of the\npriest's estate along with the scene of its desecration. _Thy wife\nin the city--shall play the harlot; and thy sons and thy daughters\nby the sword--shall fall; and thy land by the measuring rope--shall\nbe divided; and thou in an unclean land--shalt die._ Do not let us\nblame the prophet for a coarse cruelty in the first of these details.\nHe did not invent it. With all the rest it formed an ordinary\nconsequence of defeat in the warfare of the times--an inevitable item\nof that general overthrow which, with bitter emphasis, the prophet\ndescribes in Amaziah's own words: _Israel going shall go into\ncaptivity from off his own land_.\n\nThere is added a vision in line with the three which preceded the\npriest's interruption. We are therefore justified in supposing that\nAmos spoke it also on this occasion, and in taking it as the close of\nhis address at Bethel. _Then the Lord Jehovah gave me to see: and,\nbehold, a basket of \u1e32aits_, that is, _summer fruit. And He said, What\nart thou seeing, Amos? And I said, A basket of \u1e32aits. And Jehovah\nsaid unto me, The \u1e32ets--the End--has come upon My people Israel. I\nwill not again pass them over._ This does not carry the prospect\nbeyond the third vision, but it stamps its finality, and there is\ntherefore added a vivid realisation of the result. By four disjointed\nlamentations, _howls_ the prophet calls them, we are made to feel\nthe last shocks of the final collapse, and in the utter end an awful\nsilence. _And the songs of the temple shall be changed into howls\nin that day, saith the Lord Jehovah. Multitude of corpses! In every\nplace! He hath cast out! Hush!_\n\nThese then were probably the last words which Amos spoke to Israel.\nIf so, they form a curious echo of what was enforced upon himself,\nand he may have meant them as such. He was _cast out_; he was\n_silenced_. They might almost be the verbal repetition of the\npriest's orders. In any case the silence is appropriate. But Amaziah\nlittle knew what power he had given to prophecy the day he forbade it\nto speak. The gagged prophet began to write; and those accents which,\nhumanly speaking, might have died out with the songs of the temple\nof Bethel were clothed upon with the immortality of literature. Amos\nsilenced wrote a book--first of prophets to do so--and this is the\nbook we have now to study.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[130] Cornill: _Der Israelitische Prophetismus. Five Lectures for the\nEducated Laity._ 1894.\n\n[131] Amos vii. 14. See further pp. 76 f.\n\n[132] Khurbet Ta\u1e33\u00fba', Hebrew Te\u1e33\u00f4a', \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e7\u05b9\u05d5\u05e2, from \u05ea\u05e7\u05e2, _to blow a\ntrumpet_ (cf. Jer. vi. 1, _Blow the trumpet in Tekoa_) or _to pitch a\ntent_. The latter seems the more probable derivation of the name, and\nsuggests a nomadic origin, which agrees with the position of Tekoa\non the borders of the desert. Tekoa does not occur in the list of\nthe towns taken by Joshua. There are really no reasons for supposing\nthat some other Tekoa is meant. The two that have been alleged are\n(1) that Amos exclusively refers to the Northern Kingdom, (2) that\nsycomores do not grow at such levels as Tekoa. These are dealt with\non pp. 79 and 77 respectively.\n\n[133] 2 Chron. xx. 20.\n\n[134] \u05e0\u05b9\u05e7\u05b5\u05d3, n\u00f4\u1e33\u00ead, is doubtless the same as the Arabic \"na\u1e33\u1e33\u00e2d,\"\nor keeper of the \"na\u1e33ad,\" defined by Freytag as a short-legged and\ndeformed race of sheep in the Bahrein province of Arabia, from\nwhich comes the proverb \"viler than a na\u1e33ad\"; yet the wool is very\nfine. The king of Moab is called \u05e0\u05d5\u05b9\u05e7\u05b5\u05d3 in 2 Kings iii. 4 (A.V.\n_sheep-master_). In vii. 14 Amos calls himself \u05d1\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e7\u05b5\u05e8, _cattleman_,\nwhich there is no reason to alter, as some do, to \u05e0\u05b9\u05d5\u05e7\u05b5\u05d3.\n\n[135] \u05d1\u05b9\u05bc\u05d5\u05dc\u05b5\u05e1, b\u00f4l\u00eas, probably from a root (found in \u00c6thiopic) balas,\n_a fig_; hence one who _had to do with figs, handled them, ripened\nthem_.\n\n[136] The Egyptian sycomore, _Ficus sycomorus_, is not found in Syria\nabove one thousand feet above the sea, while Tekoa is more than twice\nas high as that. Cf. 1 Kings x. 27, _the sycomores that are in the\nvale_ or _valley land_, \u05e2\u05b5\u05de\u05b6\u05e7; 1 Chron. xxvii. 28, _the sycomores\nthat are in the low plains_. \"The sycamore grows in sand on the\nedge of the desert as vigorously as in the midst of a well-watered\ncountry. Its roots go deep in search of water, which infiltrates\nas far as the gorges of the hills, and they absorb it freely even\nwhere drought seems to reign supreme\" (Maspero on the Egyptian\nsycomore; _The Dawn of Civilization_, translated by McClure, p. 26).\n\"Everywhere on the confines of cultivated ground, and even at some\ndistance from the valley, are fine single sycamores flourishing as\nthough by miracle amid the sand.... They drink from water, which has\ninfiltrated from the Nile, and whose existence is nowise betrayed\nupon the surface of the soil\" (_ib._, 121). Always and still\nreverenced by Moslem and Christian.\n\n[137] So practically Oort (_Th. Tjidsch._, 1891, 121 ff.), when\ncompelled to abandon his previous conclusion (_ib._, 1880, 122 ff.)\nthat the Tekoa of Amos lay in Northern Israel.\n\n[138] In 1891 we met the Rushaideh, who cultivate Engedi, encamped\njust below Tekoa. But at other parts of the borders between the\nhill-country of Jud\u00e6a and the desert, and between Moab and the\ndesert, we found round most of the herdsmen's central wells a few\nfig-trees or pomegranates, or even apricots occasionally.\n\n[139] Luke i. 80.\n\n[140] Mark i. 18.\n\n[141] v. 5; viii. 14.\n\n[142] See p. 36.\n\n[143] Prov. xxxi. 24.\n\n[144] vi. 10.\n\n[145] i. 9.\n\n[146] v. 16.\n\n[147] v. 21 ff.\n\n[148] li. 7, 8.\n\n[149] viii. 4 ff.\n\n[150] vi. 1, 4-7.\n\n[151] See pp. 136 f.\n\n[152] i. 2.\n\n[153] \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05e4\u05e8, as has been pointed out, means in early Israel always\nthe trumpet blown as a summons to war; only in later Israel was the\nname given to the temple trumpet.\n\n[154] See further on this important passage pp. 89 ff.\n\n[155] _Shall a little bird fall on the snare earthwards and there be no\nnoose about her? Shall a snare rise from the ground and not be taking\nsomething?_ On this see p. 82. Its meaning seems to be equivalent to\nthe Scottish proverb: \"There's aye some water whan the stirkie droons.\"\n\n[156] There is thus no reason to alter the words _who shall not\nprophesy_ to _who shall not tremble_--as Wellhausen does. To do so is\nto blunt the point of the argument.\n\n[157] See Chap. IV.\n\n[158] See pp. 53 ff.\n\n[159] See pp. 69 f.\n\n[160] viii. 8.\n\n[161] viii. 9.\n\n[162] v. 14.\n\n[163] How far Assyria assisted the development of prophecy we have\nalready seen. But we have been made aware, at the same time, that\nAssyria's service to Israel in this respect presupposed the possession\nby the prophets of certain beliefs in the character and will of\ntheir God, Jehovah. The prophets' faith could never have risen to\nthe magnitude of the new problems set to it by Assyria if there had\nnot been already inherent in it that belief in the sovereignty of a\nRighteousness of which all things material were but the instruments.\n\n[164] Compare, for instance, Hosea's condemnation of Jehu's murder of\nJoram, with Elisha's command to do it; also 2 Kings iii. 19, 25, with\nDeut. xx. 19.\n\n[165] See above, p. 10.\n\n[166] Isa. xxviii.\n\n[167] Amos ii.\n\n[168] _Ante_, p. 74.\n\n[169] i. 2.\n\n[170] Therefore we see at a glance how utterly inadequate is Renan's\nbrilliant comparison of Amos to a modern revolutionary journalist\n(_Histoire du Peuple Israel_, II.). Journalist indeed! How all this\nwould-be cosmopolitan and impartial critic's judgments smack of the\nboulevards!\n\n[171] Exod. xx.; incorporated in the JE book of history, and,\naccording to nearly all critics, complete by 750; the contents must\nhave been familiar in Israel long before that. There is no trace in\nAmos of any influence peculiar to either the Deuteronomic or the\nLevitical legislation.\n\n[172] See especially Schultz, _O. T. Theol._, Eng. Trans. by\nPaterson, I. 214.\n\n[173] ii. 9-11. On this passage see further p. 137.\n\n[174] If iv. 13, v. 8 and ix. 6 be genuine, this remark equally\napplies to belief in Jehovah as Creator.\n\n[175] Kayser, _Old Testament Theology_.\n\n[176] v. 6, 14.\n\n[177] See above, p. 18.\n\n[178] iii. 2.\n\n[179] v. 21 ff.\n\n[180] Jer. vii. 22 f.\n\n[181] See above, p. 23.\n\n[182] v. 21-23.\n\n[183] vi. 8.\n\n[184] ix. 8\n\n[185] viii. 7.\n\n[186] Chap. V., p. 71.\n\n[187] vii. 11.\n\n[188] On the ministry of eighth-century prophets to the people see\nthe author's _Isaiah_, I., p. 119.\n\n[189] So LXX., followed by Hitzig and Wellhausen, by reading \u05d9\u05b5\u05e6\u05b6\u05e8\nfor \u05d9\u05b9\u05d5\u05e6\u05b5\u05e8.\n\n[190] Cf. _Hist. Geography of the Holy Land_, pp. 64 ff. The word\ntranslated _spring crop_ above is \u05dc\u05e7\u05e9, and from the same root as\nthe name of the latter rain, \u05de\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05e7\u05b9\u05d5\u05e9\u05c1, which falls in the end\nof March or beginning of April. Cf. _Zeitschrift des deutschen\nPal\u00e4stina-Vereins_, IV. 83; VIII. 62.\n\n[191] Cf. 1 Kings xviii. 5 with 1 Sam. vii. 15, 17; 1 Kings iv. 7 ff.\nSee Robertson Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, 228.\n\n[192] LXX.: _Who shall raise up Jacob again?_\n\n[193] So Professor A. B. Davidson. But the grammar might equally well\nafford the rendering _one calling that the Lord will punish with the\nfire_, the \u05dc of \u05dc\u05e8\u05d9\u05d1 marking the introduction of indirect speech (cf.\nEwald, \u00a7 338_a_). But Hitzig for \u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 reads \u05e7\u05e8\u05d4 (Deut. xxv. 18), to\noccur, happen. So similarly Wellhausen, _es nahte sich zu strafen mit\nFeuer der Herr Jahve_. All these renderings yield practically the\nsame meaning.\n\n[194] A. B. Davidson, _Syntax_, \u00a7 57, Rem. 1.\n\n[195] i. 19 f.\n\n[196] Cf. Micah ii. 3. \u05d7\u05b5\u05dc\u05b6\u05e7 is the word used, and according to the\nmotive given above stands well for the climax of the fire's destructive\nwork. This meets the objection of Wellhausen, who proposes to omit\n\u05d7\u05b5\u05dc\u05b6\u05e7, because the heat does not dry up first the great deep and then\nthe fields (_Ackerflur_). This is to mistake the obvious point of the\nsentence. The drought was so great that, after the fountains were\nexhausted, it seemed as if the solid framework of the land, described\nwith very apt pathos as the _Portion_, would be the next to disappear.\nSome take \u05d4\u05dc\u05e7 as _divided_, therefore cultivated, ground.\n\n[197] So for instance, Von Orelli.\n\n[198] Chap. iv.\n\n[199] See Chap. IV., p. 51.\n\n[200] Literally _of the plummet_, an obscure expression. It cannot\nmean plumb-straight, for the wall is condemned.\n\n[201] 2 Kings xxi. 13: _I will stretch over Jerusalem the line of\nSamaria and the plummet_ or _weight_ (\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e7\u05b9\u05dc\u05b6\u05ea) _of the house\nof Ahab_. Isa. xxxiv. 11: _He shall stretch over it the cord of\nconfusion, and the weights_ (literally _stones_) _of emptiness_.\n\n[202] John xix. 12.\n\n[203] The word _seer_ is here used in a contemptuous sense, and has\ntherefore to be translated by some such word as _visionary_.\n\n[204] Literally _eat_.\n\n[205] \u05de\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05db\u05b8\u05d4 \u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05ea--that is, a _central_ or _capital sanctuary_.\nCf. \u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b7\u05bc\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05db\u05b8\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e8 (1 Sam. xxvii. 5), _city of the kingdom_,\n_i.e._ chief or capital town.\n\n[206] 1 Kings xii. 26, 27.\n\n[207] _Prophet_ and _prophet's son_ are equivalent terms, the latter\nmeaning one of the professional guilds of prophets. There is no need\nto change herdsman, \u05d1\u05d5\u05e7\u05e8, as Wellhausen does, into \u05e0\u05d5\u05e7\u05d3, shepherd,\nthe word used in i. 1.\n\n[208] Cf. Wellhausen, _Hist._, Eng. Ed., \u00a7 6: \"Amos was the founder\nand the purest type of a new order of prophecy.\"\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VII\n\n _ATROCITIES AND ATROCITIES_\n\n AMOS i. 3-ii.\n\n\nLike all the prophets of Israel, Amos receives oracles for foreign\nnations. Unlike them, however, he arranges these oracles not after,\nbut before, his indictment of his own people, and so as to lead up\nto this. His reason is obvious and characteristic. If his aim be\nto enforce a religion independent of his people's interests and\nprivileges, how can he better do so than by exhibiting its principles\nat work outside his people, and then, with the impetus drained from\nmany areas, sweep in upon the vested iniquities of Israel herself?\nThis is the course of the first section of his book--chapters i. and\nii. One by one the neighbours of Israel are cited and condemned in\nthe name of Jehovah; one by one they are told they must fall before\nthe still unnamed engine of the Divine Justice. But when Amos has\nstirred his people's conscience and imagination by his judgment of\ntheir neighbours' sins, he turns with the same formula on themselves.\nAre they morally better? Are they more likely to resist Assyria? With\ngreater detail he shows them worse and their doom the heavier for all\ntheir privileges. Thus is achieved an oratorical triumph, by tactics\nin harmony with the principles of prophecy and remarkably suited to\nthe tempers of that time.\n\nBut Amos achieves another feat, which extends far beyond his own day.\nThe sins he condemns in the heathen are at first sight very different\nfrom those which he exposes within Israel. Not only are they sins of\nforeign relations, of treaty and war, while Israel's are all civic and\ndomestic; but they are what we call the atrocities of Barbarism--wanton\nwar, massacre and sacrilege--while Israel's are rather the sins of\nCivilisation--the pressure of the rich upon the poor, the bribery\nof justice, the seduction of the innocent, personal impurity, and\nother evils of luxury. So great is this difference that a critic more\ngifted with ingenuity than with insight might plausibly distinguish\nin the section before us two prophets with two very different views\nof national sin--a ruder prophet, and of course an earlier, who\njudged nations only by the flagrant drunkenness of their war, and a\nmore subtle prophet, and of course a later, who exposed the masked\ncorruptions of their religion and their peace. Such a theory would be\nas false as it would be plausible. For not only is the diversity of\nthe objects of the prophet's judgment explained by this, that Amos had\nno familiarity with the interior life of other nations, and could only\narraign their conduct at those points where it broke into light in\ntheir foreign relations, while Israel's civic life he knew to the very\ncore. But Amos had besides a strong and a deliberate aim in placing\nthe sins of civilisation as the climax of a list of the atrocities of\nbarbarism. He would recall what men are always forgetting, that the\nformer are really more cruel and criminal than the latter; that luxury,\nbribery and intolerance, the oppression of the poor, the corruption\nof the innocent and the silencing of the prophet--what Christ calls\noffences against His little ones--are even more awful atrocities than\nthe wanton horrors of barbarian warfare. If we keep in mind this moral\npurpose, we shall study with more interest than we could otherwise do\nthe somewhat foreign details of this section. Horrible as the outrages\nare which Amos describes, they were repeated only yesterday by Turkey:\nmany of the crimes with which he charges Israel blacken the life of\nTurkey's chief accuser, Great Britain.\n\nIn his survey Amos includes all the six states of Palestine\nthat bordered upon Israel, and lay in the way of the advance of\nAssyria--Aram of Damascus, Philistia, Tyre (for Ph\u0153nicia), Edom,\nAmmon and Moab. They are not arranged in geographical order. The\nprophet begins with Aram in the north-east, then leaps to Philistia\nin the south-west, comes north again to Tyre, crosses to the\nsouth-east and Edom, leaps Moab to Ammon, and then comes back to\nMoab. Nor is any other explanation of his order visible. Damascus\nheads the list, no doubt, because her cruelties had been most felt\nby Israel, and perhaps too because she lay most open to Assyria. It\nwas also natural to take next to Aram Philistia,[209] as Israel's\nother greatest foe; and nearest to Philistia lay Tyre. The three\nsouth-eastern principalities come together. But there may have been a\nchronological reason now unknown to us.\n\nThe authenticity of the oracles on Tyre, Edom and Judah has been\nquestioned: it will be best to discuss each case as we come to it.\n\nEach of the oracles is introduced by the formula: _Thus saith,_ or\n_hath said, Jehovah: Because of three crimes of ... yea, because\nof four, I will not turn It back._ In harmony with the rest of the\nbook,[210] Jehovah is represented as moving to punishment, not for a\nsingle sin, but for repeated and cumulative guilt. The unnamed _It_\nwhich God will not recall is not the word of judgment, but the anger\nand the hand stretched forth to smite.[211] After the formula, an\ninstance of the nation's guilt is given, and then in almost identical\nterms he decrees the destruction of all by war and captivity. Assyria\nis not mentioned, but it is the Assyrian fashion of dealing with\nconquered states which is described. Except in the case of Tyre and\nEdom, the oracles conclude as they have begun, by asserting themselves\nto be the _word of Jehovah_, or of _Jehovah the Lord_. It is no\nabstract righteousness which condemns these foreign peoples, but the\nGod of Israel, and their evil deeds are described by the characteristic\nHebrew word for sin--_crimes_, _revolts_ or _treasons_ against Him.[212]\n\n * * * * *\n\n1. ARAM OF DAMASCUS.--_Thus hath Jehovah said: Because of three\ncrimes of Damascus, yea, because of four, I will not turn It\nback; for that they threshed Gilead with iron_--or _basalt\nthreshing-sledges._ The word is _iron_, but the Arabs of to-day call\nbasalt iron; and the threshing-sledges, curved slabs[213] drawn\nrapidly by horses over the heaped corn, are studded with sharp basalt\nteeth that not only thresh out the grain, but chop the straw into\nlittle pieces. So cruelly had Gilead been chopped by Hazael and his\nson Ben-Hadad some fifty or forty years before Amos prophesied.[214]\nStrongholds were burned, soldiers slain without quarter, children\ndashed to pieces, and women with child put to a most atrocious\nend.[215] But _I shall send fire on the house of Hazael, and it shall\ndevour the palaces of Ben-Hadad_--these names are chosen, not because\nthey were typical of the Damascus dynasty, but because they were the\nvery names of the two heaviest oppressors of Israel.[216] _And I\nwill break the bolt_[217] _of Damascus, and cut off the inhabitant\nfrom Bi\u1e33'ath-Aven_--the Valley of Idolatry, so called, perhaps,\nby a play upon Bi\u1e33'ath On,[218] presumably the valley between the\nLebanons, still called the Be\u1e33'a, in which lay Heliopolis[219]--_and\nhim that holdeth the sceptre from Beth-Eden_--some royal Paradise\nin that region of Damascus, which is still the Paradise of the Arab\nworld--_and the people of Aram shall go captive to \u1e32ir_--Kir in the\nunknown north, from which they had come:[220] _Jehovah hath said_ it.\n\n2. PHILISTIA.--_Thus saith Jehovah: For three crimes of Gaza and\nfor four I will not turn It back, because they led captive a whole\ncaptivity, in order to deliver them up to Edom._ It is difficult\nto see what this means if not the wholesale depopulation of a\ndistrict in contrast to the enslavement of a few captives of war.\nBy all tribes of the ancient world, the captives of their bow and\nspear were regarded as legitimate property: it was no offence to\nthe public conscience that they should be sold into slavery. But\nthe Philistines seem, without excuse of war, to have descended\nupon certain districts and swept the whole of the population\nbefore them, for purely commercial purposes. It was professional\nslave-catching. The Philistines were exactly like the Arabs of to-day\nin Africa--not warriors who win their captives in honourable fight,\nbut slave-traders, pure and simple. In warfare in Arabia itself\nit is still a matter of conscience with the wildest nomads not to\nextinguish a hostile tribe, however bitter one be against them.[221]\nGaza is chiefly blamed by Amos, for she was the emporium of the trade\non the border of the desert, with roads and regular caravans to Petra\nand Elah on the Gulf of Akaba, both of them places in Edom and depots\nfor the traffic with Arabia.[222] _But I will cut off the inhabitant\nfrom Ashdod, and the holder of the sceptre from Askalon, and I will\nturn My hand upon Ekron_--four of the five great Philistine towns,\nGath being already destroyed, and never again to be mentioned with\nthe others[223]--_and the last of the Philistines shall perish:\nJehovah hath said it_.\n\n3. TYRE.--_Thus saith Jehovah: Because of three crimes of Tyre and\nbecause of four I will not turn It back; for that they gave up a whole\ncaptivity to Edom_--the same market as in the previous charge--_and did\nnot remember the covenant of brethren_. We do not know to what this\nrefers. The alternatives are three: that the captives were Hebrews\nand the alliance one between Israel and Edom; that the captives were\nHebrews and the alliance one between Israel and Tyre;[224] that the\ncaptives were Ph\u0153nicians and the alliance the natural brotherhood\nof Tyre and the other Ph\u0153nician towns.[225] But of these three\nalternatives the first is scarcely possible, for in such a case the\nblame would have been rather Edom's in buying than Tyre's in selling.\nThe second is possible, for Israel and Tyre had lived in close alliance\nfor more than two centuries; but the phrase _covenant of brethren_ is\nnot so well suited to a league between two tribes who felt themselves\nto belong to fundamentally different races,[226] as to the close\nkinship of the Ph\u0153nician communities. And although, in the scrappy\nrecords of Ph\u0153nician history before this time, we find no instance of\nso gross an outrage by Tyre on other Ph\u0153nicians, it is quite possible\nthat such may have occurred. During next century Tyre twice over basely\ntook sides with Assyria in suppressing the revolts of her sister\ncities.[227] Besides, the other Ph\u0153nician towns are not included in the\ncharge. We have every reason, therefore, to believe that Amos expresses\nhere not resentment against a betrayal of Israel, but indignation at\nan outrage upon natural rights and feelings with which Israel's own\ninterests were not in any way concerned. And this also suits the lofty\nspirit of the whole prophecy. _But I will send fire upon the wall of\nTyre, and it shall devour her palaces...._\n\nThis oracle against Tyre has been suspected by Wellhausen,[228] for\nthe following reasons: that it is of Tyre alone, and silence is kept\nregarding the other Ph\u0153nician cities, while in the case of Philistia\nother towns than Gaza are condemned; that the charge is the same as\nagainst Gaza; and that the usual close to the formula is wanting. But\nit would have been strange if from a list of states threatened by the\nAssyrian doom we had missed Tyre, Tyre which lay in the avenger's\nvery path. Again, that so acute a critic as Wellhausen should cite\nthe absence of other Ph\u0153nician towns from the charge against Tyre\nis really amazing, when he has just allowed that it was probably\nagainst some or all of these cities that Tyre's crime was committed.\nHow could they be included in the blame of an outrage done upon\nthemselves? The absence of the usual formula at the close may perhaps\nbe explained by omission, as indicated above.[229]\n\n4. EDOM.--_Thus saith Jehovah: Because of three crimes of Edom and\nbecause of four I will not turn It back; for that he pursued with the\nsword his brother_, who cannot be any other than Israel, _corrupted\nhis natural feelings_--literally _his bowels of mercies--and kept aye\nfretting_[230] _his anger, and his passion he watched_--like a fire,\nor _paid heed_ to it--_for ever._[231] _But I will send fire upon\nTeman_--the _South_ Region belonging to Edom--_and it shall devour the\npalaces of Bo\u1e63rah_--the Edomite Bo\u1e63rah, south-east of Petra.[232] The\nAssyrians had already compelled Edom to pay tribute.[233]\n\nThe objections to the authenticity of this oracle are more\nserious than those in the case of the oracle on Tyre. It has been\nremarked[234] that before the Jewish Exile so severe a tone could not\nhave been adopted by a Jew against Edom, who had been mostly under\nthe yoke of Judah, and not leniently treated. What were the facts?\nJoab subdued Edom for David with great cruelty.[235] Jewish governors\nwere set over the conquered people, and this state of affairs seems\nto have lasted, in spite of an Edomite attempt against Solomon,[236]\ntill 850. In Jehoshaphat's reign, 873-850, _there was no king of\nEdom, a deputy was king_, who towards 850 joined the kings of Judah\nand Israel in an invasion of Moab through his territory.[237] But,\nsoon after this invasion and perhaps in consequence of its failure,\nEdom revolted from Joram of Judah (849-842), who unsuccessfully\nattempted to put down the revolt.[238] The Edomites appear to have\nremained independent for fifty years at least. Amaziah of Judah\n(797-779) smote them,[239] but not it would seem into subjection,\nfor, according to the Chronicler, Uzziah had to win back Elath for\nthe Jews after Amaziah's death.[240] The history, therefore, of the\nrelations of Judah and Edom before the time of Amos was of such a\nkind as to make credible the existence in Judah at that time of the\nfeeling about Edom which inspires this oracle. Edom had shown just\nthe vigilant, implacable hatred here described. But was the right\nto blame them for it Judah's, who herself had so persistently waged\nwar, with confessed cruelty, against Edom? Could a Jud\u00e6an prophet\nbe just in blaming Edom and saying nothing of Judah? It is true\nthat in the fifty years of Edom's independence--the period, we must\nremember, from which Amos seems to draw the materials of all his\nother charges--there may have been events to justify this oracle\nas spoken by him; and our ignorance of that period is ample reason\nwhy we should pause before rejecting the oracle so dogmatically as\nWellhausen does. But we have at least serious grounds for suspecting\nit. To charge Edom, whom Judah has conquered and treated cruelly,\nwith restless hate towards Judah seems to fall below that high\nimpartial tone which prevails in the other oracles of this section.\nThe charge was much more justifiable at the time of the Exile, when\nEdom did behave shamefully towards Israel.[241] Wellhausen points\nout that Teman and Bo\u1e63rah are names which do not occur in the Old\nTestament before the Exile, but this is uncertain and inconclusive.\nThe oracle wants the concluding formula of the rest.[242]\n\n5. AMMON.--_Thus saith Jehovah: Because of three crimes of Ammon and\nbecause of four I will not turn It back; for that they ripped up\nGilead's women with child--in order to enlarge their borders!_ For such\nan end they committed such an atrocity! The crime is one that has been\nmore or less frequent in Semitic warfare. Wellhausen cites several\ninstances in the feuds of Arab tribes about their frontiers. The Turks\nhave been guilty of it in our own day.[243] It is the same charge\nwhich the historian of Israel puts into the mouth of Elisha against\nHazael of Aram,[244] and probably the war was the same; when Gilead was\nsimultaneously attacked by Arameans from the north and Ammonites from\nthe south. _But I will set fire to the wall of Rabbah_--Rabbath-Ammon,\nliterally _chief_ or _capital_ of Ammon--_and it shall devour her\npalaces, with clamour in the day of battle, with tempest in the day of\nstorm_. As we speak of \"storming a city,\" Amos and Isaiah[245] use the\ntempest to describe the overwhelming invasion of Assyria. There follows\nthe characteristic Assyrian conclusion: _And their king shall go into\ncaptivity, he and his princes_[246] _together, saith Jehovah_.\n\n6. MOAB.--_Thus saith Jehovah: Because of three crimes of Moab\nand because of four I will not turn It back; for that he burned\nthe bones of the king of Edom to lime._[247] In the great invasion\nof Moab, about 850, by Israel, Judah and Edom conjointly, the rage\nof Moab seems to have been directed chiefly against Edom.[248]\nWhether opportunity to appease that rage occurred on the withdrawal\nof Israel we cannot say. But either then or afterwards, balked of\ntheir attempt to secure the king of Edom alive, Moab wreaked their\nvengeance on his corpse, and burnt his bones to lime. It was, in\nthe religious belief of all antiquity, a sacrilege; yet it does not\nseem to have been the desecration of the tomb--or he would have\nmentioned it--but the wanton meanness of the deed, which Amos felt.\n_And I will send fire on Moab, and it shall devour the palaces of\nThe-Cities_--\u1e32er\u00eeoth,[249] perhaps the present \u1e32ureiyat,[250] on\nthe Moab plateau where Chemosh had his shrine[251]--_and in tumult\nshall Moab die_--to Jeremiah[252] the Moabites were the sons of\ntumult--_with clamour and with the noise of the war-trumpet. And I\nwill cut off the ruler_--literally _judge_, probably the vassal king\nplaced by Jeroboam II.--_from her_[253] _midst, and all his_[254]\n_princes will I slay with him: Jehovah hath said_ it.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThese, then, are the charges which Amos brings against the heathen\nneighbours of Israel.\n\nIf we look as a whole across the details through which we have been\nworking, what we see is a picture of the Semitic world so summary and\nso vivid that we get the like of it nowhere else--the Semitic world\nin its characteristic brokenness and turbulence; its factions and\nferocities, its causeless raids and quarrels, tribal disputes about\nboundaries flaring up into the most terrible massacres, vengeance that\nwreaks itself alike on the embryo and the corpse--_cutting up women\nwith child in Gilead,_ and _burning to lime the bones of the king of\nEdom_. And the one commerce which binds these ferocious tribes together\nis the slave-trade in its wholesale and most odious form.\n\nAmos treats none of the atrocities subjectively. It is not because\nthey have been inflicted upon Israel that he feels or condemns\nthem. The appeals of Israel against the tyrant become many as the\ncenturies go on; the later parts of the Old Testament are full of\nthe complaints of God's chosen people, conscious of their mission to\nthe world, against the heathen, who prevented them from it. Here we\nfind none of these complaints, but a strictly objective and judicial\nindictment of the characteristic crimes of heathen men against each\nother; and though this is made in the name of Jehovah, it is not in\nthe interests of His people or of any of His purposes through them,\nbut solely by the standard of an impartial righteousness which, as we\nare soon to hear, must descend in equal judgment on Israel.\n\nAgain, for the moral principles which Amos enforces no originality\ncan be claimed. He condemns neither war as a whole nor slavery as a\nwhole, but limits his curse to wanton and deliberate aggravations of\nthem: to the slave-trade in cold blood, in violation of treaties and\nfor purely commercial ends;[255] to war for trifling causes, and that\nwreaks itself on pregnant women and dead men; to national hatreds, that\nnever will be still. Now against such things there has always been in\nmankind a strong conscience, of which the word \"humanity\" is in itself\na sufficient proof. We need not here inquire into the origin of such\na common sense--whether it be some native impulse of tenderness which\nasserts itself as soon as the duties of self-defence are exhausted,\nor some rational notion of the needlessness of excesses, or whether,\nin committing these, men are visited by fear of retaliation from the\nwrath they have unnecessarily exasperated. Certain it is, that warriors\nof all races have hesitated to be wanton in their war, and have\nforeboded the special judgment of heaven upon every blind extravagance\nof hate or cruelty. It is well known how \"fey\" the Greeks felt the\ninsolence of power and immoderate anger; they are the fatal element in\nmany a Greek tragedy.[256] But the Semites themselves, whose racial\nferocity is so notorious, are not without the same feeling. \"Even the\nBeduins' old cruel rancours are often less than the golden piety of\nthe wilderness. The danger past, they can think of the defeated foemen\nwith kindness, ... putting only their trust in Ullah to obtain the\nlike at need for themselves. It is contrary to the Arabian conscience\nto extinguish a Kab\u00eela.\"[257] Similarly in Israel some of the earliest\nethical movements were revolts of the public conscience against\nhorrible outrages, like that, for instance, done by the Benjamites of\nGibeah.[258] Therefore in these oracles on his wild Semitic neighbours\nAmos discloses no new ideal for either tribe or individual. Our view is\nconfirmed that he was intent only upon rousing the natural conscience\nof his Hebrew hearers in order to engage this upon other vices to which\nit was less impressionable--that he was describing those deeds of\nwar and slavery, whose atrocity all men admitted, only that he might\nproceed to bring under the same condemnation the civic and domestic\nsins of Israel.\n\nWe turn with him, then, to Israel. But in his book as it now stands\nin our Bibles, Israel is not immediately reached. Between her and\nthe foreign nations two verses are bestowed upon Judah: _Thus saith\nJehovah: Because of three crimes of Judah and because of four I\nwill not turn It back; for that they despised the Torah of Jehovah,\nand His statutes they did not observe, and their falsehoods_--false\ngods--_led them astray, after which their fathers walked. But I will\nsend fire on Judah, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem._\nThese verses have been suspected as a later insertion,[259] on the\nground that every reference to Judah in the Book of Amos must be\nlate, that the language is very formal, and that the phrases in which\nthe sin of Judah is described sound like echoes of Deuteronomy. The\nfirst of these reasons may be dismissed as absurd; it would have been\nfar more strange if Amos had never at all referred to Judah.[260]\nThe charges, however, are not like those which Amos elsewhere makes,\nand though the phrases may be quite as early as his time,[261] the\nreader of the original, and even the reader of the English version,\nis aware of a certain tameness and vagueness of statement, which\ncontrasts remarkably with the usual pungency of the prophet's style.\nWe are forced to suspect the authenticity of these verses.\n\nWe ought to pass, then, straight from the third to the sixth verse\nof this chapter, from the oracles on foreign nations to that on\nNorthern Israel. It is introduced with the same formula as they are:\n_Thus saith Jehovah: Because of three crimes of Israel and because\nof four I will not turn It back_. But there follow a greater number\nof details, for Amos has come among his own people whom he knows\nto the heart, and he applies to them a standard more exact and an\nobligation more heavy than any he could lay to the life of the\nheathen. Let us run quickly through the items of his charge. _For\nthat they sell an honest man_[262] _for silver, and a needy man for a\npair of shoes_--proverbial, as we should say \"for an old song\"--_who\ntrample to the dust of the earth the head of the poor_--the least\nimprobable rendering of a corrupt passage[263]--_and pervert the way\nof humble men. And a man and his father will go into the maid_,\nthe same maid,[264] _to desecrate My Holy Name_--without doubt some\npublic form of unchastity introduced from the Canaanite worship into\nthe very sanctuary of Jehovah, the holy place where He reveals His\nName--_and on garments given in pledge they stretch themselves by\nevery altar, and the wine of those who have been fined they drink\nin the house of their God_. A riot of sin: the material of their\nrevels is the miseries of the poor, its stage the house of God! Such\nis religion to the Israel of Amos' day--indoors, feverish, sensual.\nBy one of the sudden contrasts he loves, Amos sweeps out of it into\nGod's ideal of religion--a great historical movement, told in the\nlanguage of the open air: national deliverance, guidance on the\nhighways of the world, the inspiration of prophecy, and the pure,\nascetic life. _But I, I destroyed the Amorite_[265] _before you,\nwhose height was as the cedars, and he was strong as oaks, and I\ndestroyed his fruit from above and his roots from below._ What a\ncontrast to the previous picture of the temple filled with fumes\nof wine and hot with lust! We are out on open history; God's gales\nblow and the forests crash before them. _And I brought you up out of\nthe land of Egypt, and led you through the wilderness forty years,\nto inherit the land of the Amorite._ Religion is not chambering and\nwantonness; it is not selfish comfort or profiting by the miseries\nof the poor and the sins of the fallen. But religion is history--the\nfreedom of the people and their education, the winning of the land\nand the defeat of the heathen foe; and then, when the land is firm\nand the home secure, it is the raising, upon that stage and shelter,\nof spiritual guides and examples. _And I raised up of your sons to\nbe prophets, and of your young men to be Nazirites_--consecrated\nand ascetic lives. _Is it not so, O children of Israel? (oracle of\nJehovah). But ye made the Nazirites drink wine, and the prophets ye\ncharged, saying, Prophesy not!_\n\nLuxury, then, and a very sensual conception of religion, with all\ntheir vicious offspring in the abuse of justice, the oppression of\nthe poor, the corrupting of the innocent, and the intolerance of\nspiritual forces--these are the sins of an enlightened and civilised\npeople, which Amos describes as worse than all the atrocities of\nbarbarism, and as certain of Divine vengeance. How far beyond his own\nday are his words still warm! Here in the nineteenth century is Great\nBritain, destroyer of the slave-traffic, and champion of oppressed\nnationalities--yet this great and Christian people, at the very time\nthey are abolishing slavery, suffer their own children to work in\nfactories and clay-pits for sixteen hours a day, and in mines set\nwomen to a labour for which horses are deemed too valuable. Things\nimprove after 1848, but how slowly and against what callousness of\nChristians Lord Shaftesbury's long and often disappointed labours\npainfully testify. Even yet our religious public, that curses the\nTurk, and in an indignation, which can never be too warm, cries out\nagainst the Armenian atrocities, is callous, nay, by the avarice of\nsome, the haste and passion for enjoyment of many more, and the\nthoughtlessness of all, itself contributes, to conditions of life and\nfashions of society, which bear with cruelty upon our poor, taint our\nliterature, needlessly increase the temptations of our large towns,\nand render pure childlife impossible among masses of our population.\nAlong some of the highways of our Christian civilisation we are just\nas cruel and just as lustful as Kurd or Turk.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAmos closes this prophecy with a vision of immediate judgment.\n_Behold, I am about to crush_ or _squeeze down upon you, as a waggon\ncrushes_[266] _that is full of sheaves._[267] An alternative reading\nsupplies the same general impression of a crushing judgment: _I will\nmake the ground quake under you, as a waggon makes it quake,_ or _as\na waggon_ itself _quakes under its load of sheaves_. This shock is to\nbe War. _Flight shall perish from the swift, and the strong shall not\nprove his power, nor the mighty man escape with his life. And he that\ngraspeth the bow shall not stand, nor shall the swift of foot escape,\nnor the horseman escape with his life. And he that thinketh himself\nstrong among the heroes shall flee away naked in that day--'tis the\noracle of Jehovah._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[209] As is done in chap. vi. 2, ix. 7.\n\n[210] So against Israel in chap. iv.\n\n[211] So Isa. v. 25: \u05e0\u05d8\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4 \u05d9\u05d3\u05d5 \u05d5\u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d0\u05e4\u05d5 \u05e9\u05d1 \u05dc\u05d0 Cf. Ezek. xx. 22: \u05d9\u05d3\u05d9\n\u05d0\u05ea \u05d5\u05d4\u05e9\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\n\n[212] \u05e4\u05e9\u05e2\u05d9\u05dd\n\n[213] Called _l\u00fbh_, _i.e._ slab.\n\n[214] These Syrian campaigns in Gilead must have taken place between\n839 and 806, the long interval during which Damascus enjoyed freedom\nfrom Assyrian invasion.\n\n[215] 2 Kings viii. 12; xiii. 7: cf. above, p. 31.\n\n[216] _He delivered them into the hand of Hazael king of Aram, and\ninto the hand of Ben-Hadad the son of Hazael, continually_ (2 Kings\nxiii. 3).\n\n[217] No need here to render _prince_, as some do.\n\n[218] So the LXX.\n\n[219] The present Baalbek (Baal of the Be\u1e33'a?). Wellhausen throws\ndoubt on the idea that Heliopolis was at this time an Aramean town.\n\n[220] ix. 7.\n\n[221] Doughty: _Arabia Deserta_, I. 335.\n\n[222] On the close connection of Edom and Gaza see _Hist. Geog._, pp.\n182 ff.\n\n[223] See _Hist. Geog._, pp. 194 ff. Wellhausen thinks Gath was\nnot yet destroyed, and quotes vi. 2; Micah i. 10, 14. But we know\nthat Hazael destroyed it, and that fact, taken in conjunction with\nits being the only omission here from the five Philistine towns,\nis evidence enough. In the passages quoted by Wellhausen there is\nnothing to the contrary: vi. 2 implies that Gath has fallen; Micah i.\n10 is the repetition of an old proverb.\n\n[224] Farrar, 53; Pusey on ver. 9; Pietschmann, _Geschichte der\nPh\u00f6nizier_, 298.\n\n[225] To which Wellhausen inclines.\n\n[226] Gen. x.\n\n[227] Under Asarhaddon, 678-676 B.C., and later under Assurbanipal\n(Pietschmann, _Gesch._, pp. 302 f.).\n\n[228] And he omits it from his translation.\n\n[229] So far from such an omission proving that the oracle is an\ninsertion, is it not more probable that an insertor would have taken\ncare to make his insertion formally correct?\n\n[230] There seems no occasion to amend with Olshausen to the _kept_\nof Psalm ciii. 9.\n\n[231] Read with LXX. \u05dc\u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 \u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05e8, though throughout the verse the LXX.\ntranslation is very vile.\n\n[232] In other two passages, Bo\u1e63rah, the city, is placed in parallel\nnot to another city, but just as here to a whole region: Isa. xxxiv.\n6, where the parallel is the _land of Edom_, and lxiii. 1, where it\nis _Edom_. There is therefore no need to take Teman in our passage as\na city, as which it does not appear before Eusebius.\n\n[233] Under Rimm\u00e2n-nirari III. (812-783). See Buhl's _Gesch. der\nEdomiter_, 65: this against Wellhausen.\n\n[234] Wellhausen, _in loco_.\n\n[235] 2 Sam. viii. 13, with 1 Kings xi. 16.\n\n[236] 1 Kings xi. 14-25.\n\n[237] 2 Kings iii.\n\n[238] 2 Kings viii. 20-22.\n\n[239] 2 Kings xiv. 10.\n\n[240] 2 Chron. xxvi. 2.\n\n[241] See, however, Buhl, _op. cit._, 67.\n\n[242] It is, however, no reason against the authenticity of the\noracle to say that Edom lay outside the path of Assyria. In answer to\nthat see the Assyrian inscriptions, _e.g._ Asarhaddon's: cf. above,\np. 129, _n._ 4.\n\n[243] Notably in the recent Armenian massacres.\n\n[244] 2 Kings viii. 12.\n\n[245] xxviii. 2, xxvii. 7, 8, where the Assyrian and another invasion\nare both described in terms of tempest.\n\n[246] The LXX. reading, _their priests and their princes_, must be\ndue to taking Malcam = _their king_ as Milcom = the Ammonite god. See\nJer. xlix. 3.\n\n[247]\n\n \"Great C\u00e6sar dead and turned to clay\n Might stop a hole to turn the wind away.\"\n\n[248] 2 Kings iii. 26. So rightly Pusey.\n\n[249] Jer. xlviii. 24 without article, but in 41 with.\n\n[250] Though this is claimed by most for \u1e32iriathaim.\n\n[251] Moabite Stone, l. 13.\n\n[252] xlviii. 45.\n\n[253] The land's.\n\n[254] The king's.\n\n[255] See above, p. 126.\n\n[256] \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 (\u00c6schylus, _Eumen._, 534): cf.\n_Odyssey_, xiv. 262; xvii. 431.\n\n[257] _I.e._ a tribe; Doughty, _Arabia Deserta_, I. 335.\n\n[258] Judges xix., xx.\n\n[259] Duhm was the first to publish reasons for rejecting the passage\n(_Theol. der Propheten_, 1875, p. 119), but Wellhausen had already\nreached the same conclusion (_Kleine Propheten_, p. 71). Oort and Stade\nadhere. On the other side see Robertson Smith, _Prophets of Israel_,\n398, and Kuenen, who adheres to Smith's arguments (_Onderzoek_).\n\n[260] \"It is plain that Amos could not have excepted Judah from the\nuniversal ruin which he saw to threaten the whole land; or at all\nevents such exception would have required to be expressly made on\nspecial grounds.\"--Robertson Smith, _Prophets_, 398.\n\n[261] _Ibid._\n\n[262] \u05e6\u05d3\u05d9\u05e7, _righteous_: hardly, as most commentators take it, the\n_legally_ (as distinguished from the _morally_) _righteous_; the\nrich cruelly used their legal rights to sell respectable and honest\nmembers of society into slavery.\n\n[263] By adapting the LXX. So far as we know Wellhausen is right in\nsaying that the Massoretic text, which our English version follows,\ngives no sense. LXX. reads, also without much sense as a whole, \u03c4\u1f70\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03b4\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c4\u1ff6\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n[264] So rightly the LXX. Or the definite article may be here used in\nconformity with the common Hebrew way of employing it to designate, not\na definite individual, but a member of a definite, well-known genus.\n\n[265] On the use of Amorite for all the inhabitants of Canaan see\nDriver's _Deut._, pp. 11 f.\n\n[266] The verb \u05e2\u05d5\u05e7 of the Massoretic text is not found elsewhere, and\nwhether we retain it, or take it as a variant of, or mistake for,\n\u05e6\u05d5\u05e7, or adopt some other reading, the whole phrase is more or less\nuncertain, and the exact shade of meaning has to be guessed, though the\ngeneral sense remains pretty much the same. The following is a complete\nnote on the subject, with reasons for adopting the above conclusion.\n\n(1) LXX.: _Behold, I roll_ (\u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03af\u03c9) _under you as a waggon full\nof straw is rolled_. A.V.: _I am pressed under you as a cart is\npressed_. Pusey: _I straiten myself under you, etc._ These versions\ntake \u05e2\u05d5\u05bc\u05e7 in the sense of \u05e6\u05d5\u05bc\u05e7, _to press_, and \u05ea\u05d7\u05ea in its usual\nmeaning of _beneath_; and the result is conformable to the well-known\nfigure of the Old Testament by which God is said to be laden and\nweary with the transgressions of His people. But this does not mean\nan actual descent of judgment, and yet vv. 14-16 imply that such an\nintimation has been made in ver. 13; and besides \u05d8\u05e2\u05d9\u05e7 and \u05ea\u05e2\u05d9\u05e7 are\nboth in the Hiphil, the active, _to press_, or causative, _make to\npress_. (2) Accordingly some, adopting this sense of the verb, take\n\u05ea\u05d7\u05ea in an unusual sense of _down upon_. Ewald: _I press down upon you\nas a cart that is full of sheaves presseth_. Guthe (in Kautzsch's\n_Bibel_): _Ich will euch quetschen_. Rev. Eng. Ver.: _I will press\nyou in your place_.--But \u05d5\u05e7\u05e2 has been taken in other senses. (3)\nHoffmann (_Z.A.T.W._, III. 100) renders it _groan_ in conformity\nwith Arab. '\u00ee\u1e33. (4) Wetzstein (_ibid._, 278 ff.) quotes Arab. '\u00e2\u1e33,\nto _stop_, _hinder_, and suggests _I will bring to a stop_. (5) Buhl\n(12th Ed. of Gesenius' _Handw\u00f6rt_, sub \u05e2\u05d5\u05bc\u05e7), in view of possibility\nof \u05e2\u05d2\u05dc\u05d4 being threshing-roller, recalls Arab. 'a\u1e33\u1e33, _to cut in\npieces_. (6) Hitzig (_Exeg. Handbuch_) proposed to read \u05de\u05e4\u05d9\u05e7 and\n\u05ea\u05e4\u05d9\u05e7: _I will make it shake under you, as the laden waggon shakes_\n(the ground). So rather differently Wellhausen: _I will make the\nground quake under you, as a waggon quakes under its load of sheaves_.\n\nI have only to add that, in the Alex. Cod. of LXX., which reads \u03ba\u03c9\u03bb\u03cd\u03c9\nfor \u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03af\u03c9, we have an interesting analogy to Wetzstein's proposal;\nand that in support of the rendering of Ewald, and its unusual\ninterpretation of \u05ea\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9\u05db\u05dd which seems to me on the whole the most\nprobable, we may compare Job xxxvi. 16, \u05ea\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9\u05d4 \u05de\u05d5\u05e6\u05e7 \u05dc\u05d0. This, it is\ntrue, suggests rather the choking of a passage than the crushing of\nthe ground; but, by the way, that sense is even more applicable to a\nharvest waggon laden with sheaves.\n\n[267] _Waggon full of sheaves._--Wellhausen goes too far when he\nsuggests that Amos would have to go outside Palestine to see such\na waggon. That a people who already knew the use of chariots for\ntravelling (cf. Gen. xlvi. 5, JE) and waggons for agricultural\npurposes (1 Sam. vi. 7 ff.) did not use them at least in the lowlands\nof their country is extremely improbable. Cf. _Hist. Geog._, Appendix\non _Roads and Wheeled Vehicles in Syria_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII\n\n _CIVILISATION AND JUDGMENT_\n\n AMOS iii.-iv. 3.\n\n\nWe now enter the Second Section of the Book of Amos: chaps. iii.-vi.\nIt is a collection of various oracles of denunciation, grouped partly\nby the recurrence of the formula _Hear this word_, which stands\nat the head of our present chapters iii., iv. and v., which are\ntherefore probably due to it; partly by two cries of _Woe_ at v. 18\nand vi. 1; and also by the fact that each of the groups thus started\nleads up to an emphatic, though not at first detailed, prediction of\nthe nation's doom (iii. 13-15; iv. 3; iv. 12; v. 16, 17; v. 26, 27;\nvi. 14). Within these divisions lie a number of short indictments,\nsentences of judgment and the like, which have no further logical\nconnection than is supplied by their general sameness of subject, and\na perceptible increase of articulateness from beginning to end of\nthe Section. The sins of Israel are more detailed, and the judgment\nof war, coming from the North, advances gradually till we discern\nthe unmistakable ranks of Assyria. But there are various parentheses\nand interruptions, which cause the student of the text no little\ndifficulty. Some of these, however, may be only apparent: it will\nalways be a question whether their want of immediate connection\nwith what precedes them is not due to the loss of several words\nfrom the text rather than to their own intrusion into it. Of others\nit is true that they are obviously out of place as they lie; their\nremoval brings together verses which evidently belong to each other.\nEven such parentheses, however, may be from Amos himself. It is only\nwhere a verse, besides interrupting the argument, seems to reflect\na historical situation later than the prophet's day, that we can be\nsure it is not his own. And in all this textual criticism we must\nkeep in mind, that the obscurity of the present text of a verse, so\nfar from being an adequate proof of its subsequent insertion, may be\nthe very token of its antiquity, scribes or translators of later date\nhaving been unable to understand it. To reject a verse, only because\n_we_ do not see the connection, would surely be as arbitrary, as the\nopposite habit of those who, missing a connection, invent one, and\nthen exhibit their artificial joint as evidence of the integrity of\nthe whole passage. In fact we must avoid all headstrong surgery, for\nto a great extent we work in the dark.\n\nThe general subject of the Section may be indicated by the title:\nReligion and Civilisation. A vigorous community, wealthy, cultured\nand honestly religious, are, at a time of settled peace and growing\npower, threatened, in the name of the God of justice, with their\ncomplete political overthrow. Their civilisation is counted for\nnothing; their religion, on which they base their confidence, is\ndenounced as false and unavailing. These two subjects are not, and\ncould not have been, separated by the prophet in any one of his\noracles. But in the first, the briefest and most summary of these,\nchaps. iii.-iv. 3, it is mainly with the doom of the civil structure\nof Israel's life that Amos deals; and it will be more convenient\nfor us to take them first, with all due reference to the echoes of\nthem in later parts of the Section. From iv. 4-vi. it is the Religion\nand its false peace which he assaults; and we shall take that in the\nnext chapter. _First_, then, Civilisation and Judgment (iii.-iv. 3);\n_Second_, The False Peace of Ritual (iv. 4-vi.).\n\n * * * * *\n\nThese few brief oracles open upon the same note as that in which the\nprevious Section closed--that the crimes of Israel are greater than\nthose of the heathen; and that the people's peculiar relation to God\nmeans, not their security, but their greater judgment. It is then\naffirmed that Israel's wealth and social life are so sapped by luxury\nand injustice that the nation must perish. And, as in every luxurious\ncommunity the women deserve especial blame, the last of the group of\noracles is reserved for them (iv. 1-3).\n\n_Hear this word, which Jehovah hath spoken against you, O children of\nIsrael, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of\nEgypt_--Judah as well as North Israel, so that we see the vanity of\na criticism which would cast out of the Book of Amos as unauthentic\nevery reference to Judah. _Only you have I known of all the families\nof the ground_--not world, but _ground_, purposely chosen to stamp\nthe meanness and mortality of them all--_therefore will I visit upon\nyou all your iniquities_.\n\nThis famous text has been called by various writers \"the keynote,\" \"the\nlicence\" and \"the charter\" of prophecy. But the names are too petty\nfor what is not less than the fulmination of an element. It is a peal\nof thunder we hear. It is, in a moment, the explosion and discharge\nof the full storm of prophecy. As when from a burst cloud the streams\nimmediately below rise suddenly and all their banks are overflowed,\nso the prophecies that follow surge and rise clear of the old limits\nof Israel's faith by the unconfined, unmeasured flood of heaven's\njustice that breaks forth by this single verse. Now, once for all, are\nsubmerged the lines of custom and tradition within which the course of\nreligion has hitherto flowed; and, as it were, the surface of the world\nis altered. It is a crisis which has happened more than once again in\nhistory: when helpless man has felt the absolute relentlessness of the\nmoral issues of life; their renunciation of the past, however much they\nhave helped to form it; their sacrifice of every development however\ncostly, and of every hope however pure; their deafness to prayer, their\nindifference to penitence; when no faith saves a Church, no courage a\npeople, no culture or prestige even the most exalted order of men; but\nat the bare hands of a judgment, uncouth of voice and often unconscious\nof a Divine mission, the results of a great civilisation are for its\nsins swept remorselessly away.\n\nBefore the storm bursts, we learn by its lightnings some truths\nfrom the old life that is to be destroyed. _You only have I known\nof all the families of the ground: therefore will I visit your\niniquities upon you._ Religion is no insurance against judgment, no\nmere atonement and escape from consequences. Escape! Religion is\nonly opportunity--the greatest moral opportunity which men have, and\nwhich if they violate nothing remains for them but a certain fearful\nlooking forward unto judgment. You only have I known; and because you\ndid not take the moral advantage of My intercourse, because you felt\nit only as privilege and pride, pardon for the past and security for\nthe future, therefore doom the more inexorable awaits you.\n\nThen as if the people had interrupted him with the question, What\nsign do you give us that this judgment is near?--Amos goes aside into\nthat noble digression (vv. 3-8) on the harmony between the prophet's\nword and the imminent events of the time, which we have already\nstudied.[268] From this apologia, verse 9 returns to the note of\nverses 1 and 2 and develops it. Not only is Israel's responsibility\ngreater than that of other people's. Her crimes themselves are more\nheinous. _Make proclamation over the palaces in Ashdod_--if we are\nnot to read Assyria here,[269] then the name of Ashdod has perhaps\nbeen selected from all other heathen names because of its similarity\nto the Hebrew word for that _violence_[270] with which Amos is\ncharging the people--_and over the palaces of the land of Egypt, and\nsay, Gather upon the Mount_[271] _of Samaria and see! Confusions\nmanifold in the midst of her; violence to her very core! Yea, they\nknow not how to do uprightness, saith Jehovah, who store up wrong and\nviolence in their palaces._\n\n\"To their crimes,\" said the satirist of the Romans, \"they owe their\ngardens, palaces, stables and fine old plate.\"[272] And William\nLangland declared of the rich English of his day:--\n\n \"For toke thei on trewly \u00b7 they tymbred not so heigh,\n Ne boughte non burgages \u00b7 be ye full certayne.\"[273]\n\n_Therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Siege and Blockade of the\nLand!_[274] _And they shall bring down from off thee thy fortresses,\nand plundered shall be thy palaces._ Yet this shall be no ordinary\ntide of Eastern war, to ebb like the Syrian as it flowed, and leave\nthe nation to rally on their land again. For Assyria devours the\npeoples. _Thus saith Jehovah: As the shepherd saveth from the mouth\nof the lion a pair of shin-bones or a bit of an ear, so shall the\nchildren of Israel be saved--they who sit in Samaria in the corner\nof the diwan and ... on a couch._[275] The description, as will be\nseen from the note below, is obscure. Some think it is intended\nto satirise a novel and affected fashion of sitting adopted by\nthe rich. Much more probably it means that carnal security in the\nluxuries of civilisation which Amos threatens more than once in\nsimilar phrases.[276] The corner of the diwan is in Eastern houses\nthe seat of honour.[277] To this desert shepherd, with only the\nhard ground to rest on, the couches and ivory-mounted diwans of the\nrich must have seemed the very symbols of extravagance. But the\npampered bodies that loll their lazy lengths upon them shall be left\nlike the crumbs of a lion's meal--_two shin-bones and the bit of an\near!_ Their whole civilisation shall perish with them. _Hearken and\ntestify against the house of Israel--oracle of the Lord Jehovah,\nGod of Hosts_[278]--those addressed are still the heathen summoned\nin ver. 9. _For on the day when I visit the crimes of Israel upon\nhim, I shall then make visitation upon the altars of Bethel, and the\nhorns of the altar_, which men grasp in their last despair, _shall\nbe smitten and fall to the earth. And I will strike the winter-house\nupon the summer-house, and the ivory houses shall perish, yea, swept\naway shall be houses many--oracle of Jehovah._\n\nBut the luxury of no civilisation can be measured without its women,\nand to the women of Samaria Amos now turns with the most scornful\nof all his words. _Hear this word_--this for you--_kine of Bashan\nthat are in the mount of Samaria, that oppress the poor, that crush\nthe needy, that say to their lords, Bring, and let us drink. Sworn\nhath the Lord Jehovah by His holiness, lo, days are coming when\nthere shall be a taking away of you with hooks, and of the last of\nyou with fish-hooks._ They put hooks[279] in the nostrils of unruly\ncattle, and the figure is often applied to human captives;[280] but\nso many should these cattle of Samaria be that for the _last of them\nfish-hooks_ must be used. _Yea, by the breaches_ in the wall of the\nstormed city _shall ye go out, every one headlong, and ye shall be\ncast ..._[281] _oracle of Jehovah_. It is a cowherd's rough picture\nof women: a troop of kine--heavy, heedless animals, trampling in\ntheir anxiety for food upon every frail and lowly object in the way.\nBut there is a prophet's insight into character. Not of Jezebels,\nor Messalinas, or Lady-Macbeths is it spoken, but of the ordinary\nmatrons of Samaria. Thoughtlessness and luxury are able to make\nbrutes out of women of gentle nurture, with homes and a religion.[282]\n\n * * * * *\n\nSuch are these three or four short oracles of Amos. They are probably\namong his earliest--the first peremptory challenges of prophecy to\nthat great stronghold which before forty years she is to see thrown\ndown in obedience to her word. As yet, however, there seems to be\nnothing to justify the menaces of Amos. Fair and stable rises the\nstructure of Israel's life. A nation, who know themselves elect, who\nin politics are prosperous and in religion proof to every doubt,\nbuild high their palaces, see the skies above them unclouded, and\nbask in their pride, heaven's favourites without a fear. This man,\nsolitary and sudden from his desert, springs upon them in the name of\nGod and their poor. Straighter word never came from Deity: _Jehovah\nhath spoken, who can but prophesy?_ The insight of it, the justice of\nit, are alike convincing. Yet at first it appears as if it were sped\non the personal and very human passion of its herald. For Amos not\nonly uses the desert's cruelties--the lion's to the sheep--to figure\nGod's impending judgment upon His people, but he enforces the latter\nwith all a desert-bred man's horror of cities and civilisation. It is\ntheir costly furniture, their lavish and complex building, on which\nhe sees the storm break. We seem to hear again that frequent phrase\nof the previous section: _the fire shall devour the palaces thereof_.\nThe palaces, he says, are simply storehouses of oppression; the\npalaces will be plundered. Here, as throughout his book,[283] couches\nand diwans draw forth the scorn of a man accustomed to the simple\nfurniture of the tent. But observe his especial hatred of houses.\nFour times in one verse he smites them: _winter-house on summer-house\nand the ivory houses shall perish--yea, houses manifold, saith the\nLord_. So in another oracle of the same section: _Houses of ashlar\nye have built, and ye shall not inhabit them; vineyards of delight\nhave ye planted, and ye shall not drink of their wine_.[284] And in\nanother: _I loathe the pride of Jacob, and his palaces I hate; and I\nwill give up a city and all that is in it.... For, lo, the Lord is\nabout to command, and He will smite the great house into ruins and\nthe small house into splinters._[285] No wonder that such a prophet\nfound war with its breached walls insufficient, and welcomed, as the\nfull ally of his word, the earthquake itself.[286]\n\nYet all this is no mere desert \"razzia\" in the name of the Lord, a\nnomad's hatred of cities and the culture of settled men. It is not\na temper; it is a vision of history. In the only argument which\nthese early oracles contain, Amos claims to have events on the side\nof his word. _Shall the lion roar and not be catching_ something?\nNeither does the prophet speak till he knows that God is ready to\nact. History accepted this claim. Amos spoke about 755. In 734\nTiglath-Pileser swept Gilead and Galilee; in 724 Shalmaneser overran\nthe rest of Northern Israel: _siege and blockade of the whole land!_\nFor three years the Mount of Samaria was invested, and then taken;\nthe houses overthrown, the rich and the delicate led away captive. It\nhappened as Amos foretold; for it was not the shepherd's rage within\nhim that spoke. He had _seen the Lord standing, and He said, Smite_.\n\nBut this assault of a desert nomad upon the structure of a nation's\nlife raises many echoes in history and some questions in our own\nminds to-day. Again and again have civilisations far more powerful\nthan Israel's been threatened by the desert in the name of God, and\nin good faith it has been proclaimed by the prophets of Christianity\nand other religions that God's kingdom cannot come on earth till the\nwealth, the culture, the civil order, which men have taken centuries\nto build, have been swept away by some great political convulsion.\nTo-day Christianity herself suffers the same assaults, and is told by\nmany, the high life and honest intention of whom cannot be doubted,\nthat till the civilisation which she has so much helped to create\nis destroyed, there is no hope for the purity or the progress of\nthe race. And Christianity, too, has doubts within herself. What is\nthe world which our Master refused in the Mount of Temptation, and\nso often and so sternly told us that it must perish?--how much of\nour wealth, of our culture, of our politics, of the whole fabric of\nour society? No thoughtful and religious man, when confronted with\ncivilisation, not in its ideal, but in one of those forms which\ngive it its very name, the life of a large city, can fail to ask,\nHow much of this deserves the judgment of God? How much must be\noverthrown, before His will is done on earth? All these questions\nrise in the ears and the heart of a generation, which more than any\nother has been brought face to face with the ruins of empires and\ncivilisations, which have endured longer, and in their day seemed\nmore stable, than her own.\n\nIn face of the confused thinking and fanatic speech which have risen\non all such topics, it seems to me that the Hebrew prophets supply us\nwith four cardinal rules.\n\nFirst, of course, they insist that it is the moral question upon\nwhich the fate of a civilisation is decided. By what means has this\nsystem grown? Is justice observed in essence as well as form? Is\nthere freedom, or is the prophet silenced? Does luxury or self-denial\nprevail? Do the rich make life hard for the poor? Is childhood\nsheltered and is innocence respected? By these, claim the prophets,\na nation stands or falls; and history has proved the claim on wider\nworlds than they dreamt of.\n\nBut by themselves moral reasons are never enough to justify a\nprediction of speedy doom upon any system or society. None of the\nprophets began to foretell the fall of Israel till they read, with\nkeener eyes than their contemporaries, the signs of it in current\nhistory. And this, I take it, was the point which made a notable\ndifference between them, and one who like them scourged the social\nwrongs of his civilisation, yet never spoke a word of its fall.\nJuvenal nowhere calls down judgments, except upon individuals. In his\ntime there were no signs of the decline of the empire, even though,\nas he marks, there was a flight from the capital of the virtue which\nwas to keep the empire alive. But the prophets had political proof of\nthe nearness of God's judgment, and they spoke in the power of its\ncoincidence with the moral corruption of their people.\n\nAgain, if conscience and history (both of them, to the prophets,\nbeing witnesses of God) thus combine to announce the early doom of a\ncivilisation, neither the religion that may have helped to build it,\nnor any remanent virtue in it, nor its ancient value to God, can avail\nto save. We are tempted to judge that the long and costly development\nof ages is cruelly thrown away by the convulsion and collapse of an\nempire; it feels impious to think that the patience, the providence,\nthe millennial discipline of the Almighty are to be in a moment\nabandoned to some rude and savage force. But we are wrong. _You only\nhave I known of all the families of the ground_, yet I must _visit upon\nyou your iniquities._ Nothing is too costly for justice. And God finds\nsome other way of conserving the real results of the past.\n\nAgain, it is a corollary of all this, that the sentence upon\ncivilisation must often seem to come by voices that are insane, and\nits execution by means that are criminal. Of course, when civilisation\nis arraigned as a whole, and its overthrow demanded, there may be\nnothing behind the attack but jealousy or greed, the fanaticism of\nignorant men or the madness of disordered lives. But this is not\nnecessarily the case. For God has often in history chosen the outsider\nas the herald of doom, and sent the barbarian as its instrument. By\nthe statesmen and patriots of Israel, Amos must have been regarded as\na mere savage, with a savage's hate of civilisation. But we know what\nhe answered when Amaziah called him rebel. And it was not only for its\nsuddenness that the apostles said the _day of the Lord should come as\na thief_, but also because of its methods. For over and over again has\ndoom been pronounced, and pronounced truly, by men who in the eyes of\ncivilisation were criminals and monsters.\n\nNow apply these four principles to the question of ourselves. It will\nscarcely be denied that our civilisation tolerates, and in part\nlives by, the existence of vices which, as we all admit, ruined the\nancient empires. Are the political possibilities of overthrow also\npresent? That there exist among us means of new historic convulsions\nis a thing hard for us to admit. But the signs cannot be hid. When\nwe see the jealousies of the Christian peoples, and their enormous\npreparations for battle; the arsenals of Europe which a few sparks\nmay blow up; the millions of soldiers one man's word may mobilise;\nwhen we imagine the opportunities which a general war would furnish\nto the discontented masses of the European proletariat,--we must\nsurely acknowledge the existence of forces capable of inflicting\ncalamities, so severe as to affect not merely this nationality\nor that type of culture, but the very vigour and progress of\ncivilisation herself; and all this without our looking beyond\nChristendom, or taking into account the rise of the yellow races to a\nconsciousness of their approach to equality with ourselves. If, then,\nin the eyes of the Divine justice Christendom merits judgment,--if\nlife continue to be left so hard to the poor; if innocence be still\nan impossibility for so much of the childhood of the Christian\nnations; if with so many of the leaders of civilisation prurience\nbe lifted to the level of an art, and licentiousness followed as\na cult; if we continue to pour the evils of our civilisation upon\nthe barbarian, and \"the vices of our young nobles,\" to paraphrase\nJuvenal, \"are aped in\" Hindustan,--then let us know that the\nmeans of a judgment more awful than any which has yet scourged a\ndelinquent civilisation are extant and actual among us. And if one\nshould reply, that our Christianity makes all the difference, that\nGod cannot undo the development of nineteen centuries, or cannot\noverthrow the peoples of His Son,--let us remember that God does\njustice at whatever cost; that as He did not spare Israel at the\nhands of Assyria, so He did not spare Christianity in the East when\nthe barbarians of the desert found her careless and corrupt. _You\nonly have I known of all the families of the ground, therefore will I\nvisit upon you all your iniquities._\n\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IX\n\n _THE FALSE PEACE OF RITUAL_\n\n AMOS iv. 4-vi.\n\n\nThe next four groups of oracles[287]--iv. 4-13, v. 1-17, v. 18-27\nand vi.--treat of many different details, and each of them has its\nown emphasis; but all are alike in this, that they vehemently attack\nthe national worship and the sense of political security which it\nhas engendered. Let us at once make clear that this worship is the\nworship of Jehovah. It is true that it is mixed with idolatry, but,\nexcept possibly in one obscure verse,[288] Amos does not concern\nhimself with the idols. What he strikes at, what he would sweep away,\nis his people's form of devotion to their own God. The cult of the\nnational God, at the national sanctuaries, in the national interest\nand by the whole body of the people, who practise it with a zeal\nunparalleled by their forefathers--this is what Amos condemns. And\nhe does so absolutely. He has nothing but scorn for the temples and\nthe feasts. The assiduity of attendance, the liberality of gifts,\nthe employment of wealth and art and patriotism in worship--he tells\nhis generation that God loathes it all. Like Jeremiah, he even\nseems to imply that God never instituted in Israel any sacrifice\nor offering.[289] It is all this which gives these oracles their\ninterest for us; and that interest is not merely historical.\n\nIt is indeed historical to begin with. When we find, not idolatry, but\nall religious ceremonial--temples, public worship, tithes, sacrifice,\nthe praise of God by music, in fact every material form in which\nman has ever been wont to express his devotion to God--scorned and\ncondemned with the same uncompromising passion as idolatry itself, we\nreceive a needed lesson in the history of religion. For when one is\nasked, What is the distinguishing characteristic of heathenism? one is\nalways ready to say, Idolatry, which is not true. The distinguishing\ncharacteristic of heathenism is the stress which it lays upon\nceremonial. To the pagan religions, both of the ancient and of the\nmodern world, rites were the indispensable element in religion. The\ngifts of the gods, the abundance of fruits, the security of the state,\ndepended upon the full and accurate performance of ritual. In Greek\nliterature we have innumerable illustrations of this: the _Iliad_\nitself starts from a god's anger, roused by an insult to his priest,\nwhose prayers for vengeance he hears because sacrifices have been\nassiduously offered to him. And so too with the systems of paganism\nfrom which the faith of Israel, though at first it had so much in\ncommon with them, broke away to its supreme religious distinction.\nThe Semites laid the stress of their obedience to the gods upon\ntraditional ceremonies; and no sin was held so heinous by them as the\nneglect or infringement of a religious rite. By the side of it offences\nagainst one's fellow-men or one's own character were deemed mere\nmisdemeanours. In the day of Amos this pagan superstition thoroughly\npenetrated the religion of Jehovah, and so absorbed the attention of\nmen, that without the indignant and complete repudiation of it prophecy\ncould not have started on her task of identifying morality with\nreligion, and of teaching men more spiritual views of God. But even\nwhen we are thus aware of ceremonialism as the characteristic quality\nof the pagan religions, we have not measured the full reason of that\nuncompromising attack on it, which is the chief feature of this part\nof the permanent canon of our religion. For idolatries die everywhere;\nbut everywhere a superstitious ritualism survives. It continues with\nphilosophies that have ceased to believe in the gods who enforced it.\nUpon ethical movements which have gained their freedom by breaking away\nfrom it, in the course of time it makes up, and lays its paralysing\nweight. With offers of help it flatters religions the most spiritual\nin theory and intention. The Pharisees, than whom few parties had at\nfirst purer ideals of morality, tithed mint, anise and cummin, to the\nneglect of the essence of the Law; and even sound Christians, who\nhave assimilated the Gospel of St. John, find it hard and sometimes\nimpossible to believe in salvation apart from their own sacraments, or\noutside their own denominational forms. Now this is because ritual is\na thing which appeals both to the baser and to the nobler instincts of\nman. To the baser it offers itself as a mechanical atonement for sin,\nand a substitute for all moral and intellectual effort in connection\nwith faith; to the nobler it insists on a man's need in religion of\norder and routine, of sacrament and picture. Plainly then the words\nof Amos have significance for more than the immediate problems of his\nday. And if it seem to some, that Amos goes too far with his cry to\nsweep away all ceremonial, let them remember, besides the crisis of\nhis times, that the temper he exposes and seeks to dissipate is a rank\nand obdurate error of the human heart. Our Lord, who recognised the\nplace of ritual in worship, who said, _Thus it behoveth us to fulfil\nall righteousness_, which righteousness in the dialect of His day\nwas not the moral law, but man's due of rite, sacrifice, tithe and\nalms,[290] said also, _I will have mercy and not sacrifice_. There is\nan irreducible minimum of rite and routine in worship; there is an\ninvaluable loyalty to traditional habits; there are holy and spiritual\nuses in symbol and sacrament. But these are all dispensable; and\nbecause they are all constantly abused, the voice of the prophet is\never needed which tells us that God will have none of them; but let\njustice roll on like water, and righteousness like an unfailing stream.\n\nFor the superstition that ritual is the indispensable bond between\nGod and man, Amos substitutes two other aspects of religion. They are\nhistory as God's discipline of man; and civic justice, as man's duty\nto God. The first of them he contrasts with religious ceremonialism\nin chap. iv. 4-13, and the second in chap. v.; while in chap. vi. he\nassaults once more the false political peace which the ceremonialism\nengenders.\n\n\n 1. FOR WORSHIP, CHASTISEMENT.\n\n AMOS iv. 4-13.\n\nIn chap. ii. Amos contrasted the popular conception of religion as\nworship with God's conception of it as history. He placed a picture\nof the sanctuary, hot with religious zeal, but hot too with passion\nand the fumes of wine, side by side with a great prospect of the\nnational history: God's guidance of Israel from Egypt onwards. That\nis, as we said at the time, he placed an indoors picture of religion\nside by side with an open-air one. He repeats that arrangement here.\nThe religious services he sketches are more pure, and the history he\ntakes from his own day; but the contrast is the same. Again we have\non the one side the temple worship--artificial, exaggerated, indoors,\nsmoky; but on the other a few movements of God in Nature, which,\nthough they all be calamities, have a great moral majesty upon them.\nThe first opens with a scornful call to worship, which the prophet,\nletting out his whole heart at the beginning, shows to be equivalent\nto sin. Note next the impossible caricature of their exaggerated\nzeal: sacrifices every morning instead of once a year, tithes every\nthree days instead of every three years.[291] To offer leavened\nbread was a departure from the older fashion of unleavened.[292] To\npublish their liberality was like the later Pharisees, who were not\ndissimilarly mocked by our Lord: _When thou doest alms, cause not\na trumpet to be sounded before thee, as the hypocrites do in the\nsynagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men._[293]\nThere is a certain rhythm in the taunt; but the prose style seems\nto be resumed with fitness when the prophet describes the solemn\napproach of God in deeds of doom.\n\n _Come away to Bethel and transgress,\n At Gilgal exaggerate your transgression!\n And bring every morning your sacrifices,\n Every three days your tithes!\n And send up the savour of leavened bread as a thank-offering,\n And call out your liberalities--make them to be heard!\n For so ye love_ to do, _O children of Israel:\n Oracle of Jehovah._\n\n_But I on My side have given you cleanness of teeth in all your\ncities, and want of bread in all your places--yet ye did not return\nto Me: oracle of Jehovah._\n\n_But I on My side withheld from you the winter rain,_[294] _while it\nwas still three months to the harvest: and I let it rain repeatedly\non one city, and upon one city I did not let it rain: one lot was\nrained upon, and the lot that was not rained upon withered; and two\nor three cities kept straggling to one city to drink water, and were\nnot satisfied--yet ye did not return to Me: oracle of Jehovah._\n\n_I smote you with blasting and with mildew: many of your gardens and\nyour vineyards and your figs and your olives the locust devoured--yet\nye did not return to Me: oracle of Jehovah._\n\n_I sent among you a pestilence by way of Egypt:_[295] _I slew with\nthe sword your youths--besides the capture of your horses--and I\nbrought up the stench of your camps to your nostrils--yet ye did not\nreturn to Me: oracle of Jehovah._\n\n_I overturned among you, like God's own overturning of Sodom and\nGomorrah, till ye became as a brand plucked from the burning--yet ye\ndid not return to Me: oracle of Jehovah._\n\nThis recalls a passage in that English poem of which we are again and\nagain reminded by the Book of Amos, _The Vision of Piers Plowman_. It\nis the sermon of Reason in Passus V. (Skeat's edition):--\n\n \"He preved that thise pestilences \u00b7 were for pure synne,\n And the southwest wynde \u00b7 in saterday et evene\n Was pertliche[296] for pure pride \u00b7 and for no poynt elles.\n Piries and plomtrees \u00b7 were puffed to the erthe,\n In ensample ze segges[297] \u00b7 ze shulden do the bettere.\n Beches and brode okes \u00b7 were blowen to the grounde.\n Torned upward her tailles \u00b7 in tokenynge of drede,\n That dedly synne at domesday \u00b7 shal fordon[298] hem alle.\"\n\nIn the ancient world it was a settled belief that natural calamities\nlike these were the effects of the deity's wrath. When Israel suffers\nfrom them the prophets take for granted that they are for the people's\npunishment. I have elsewhere shown how the climate of Palestine lent\nitself to these convictions; in this respect the Book of Deuteronomy\ncontrasts it with the climate of Egypt.[299] And although some, perhaps\nrightly, have scoffed at the exaggerated form of the belief, that God\nis angry with the sons of men every time drought or floods happen,\nyet the instinct is sound which in all ages has led religious people\nto feel that such things are inflicted for moral purposes. In the\neconomy of the universe there may be ends of a purely physical kind\nserved by such disasters, apart altogether from their meaning to man.\nBut man at least learns from them that nature does not exist solely\nfor feeding, clothing and keeping him wealthy; nor is it anything else\nthan his monotheism, his faith in God as the Lord both of his moral\nlife and of nature, which moves him to believe, as Hebrew prophets\ntaught and as our early English seer heard Reason herself preach. Amos\nhad the more need to explain those disasters as the work of the God\nof righteousness, because his contemporaries, while willing to grant\nJehovah leadership in war, were tempted to attribute to the Canaanite\ngods of the land all power over the seasons.\n\nWhat, however, more immediately concerns us in this passage is its\nvery effective contrast between men's treatment of God and God's\ntreatment of men. They lavish upon Him gifts and sacrifices. He--_on\nHis side_--sends them cleanness of teeth, drought, blasting of their\nfruits, pestilence, war and earthquake. That is to say, they regard\nHim as a being only to be flattered and fed. He regards them as\ncreatures with characters to discipline, even at the expense of their\nmaterial welfare. Their views of Him, if religious, are sensuous and\ngross; His views of them, if austere, are moral and ennobling. All\nthis may be grim, but it is exceeding grand; and short as the efforts\nof Amos are, we begin to perceive in him something already of the\ngreatness of an Isaiah.\n\nAnd have not those, who have believed as Amos believed, ever been the\nstrong spirits of our race, making the very disasters which crushed\nthem to the earth the tokens that God has great views about them?\nLaugh not at the simple peoples, who have their days of humiliation,\nand their fast-days after floods and stunted harvests. For they\ntake these, not like other men, as the signs of their frailty and\nhelplessness; but as measures of the greatness God sees in them, His\nprovocation of their souls to the infinite possibilities which He has\nprepared for them.\n\nIsrael, however, did not turn even at the fifth call to penitence,\nand so there remained nothing for her but a fearful looking forward\nto judgment, all the more terrible that the prophet does not define\nwhat the judgment shall be.\n\n_Therefore thus shall I do to thee, O Israel: because I am going to\ndo this to thee, prepare to meet thy God, O Israel. For, lo, He that\nformeth the mountains, and createth the wind, and declareth to man\nwhat His thought is, that maketh morning darkness, and marcheth on\nthe high places of earth, Jehovah, God of Hosts, is His Name._[300]\n\n\n 2. FOR WORSHIP, JUSTICE.\n\n AMOS v.\n\nIn the next of these groups of oracles Amos continues his attack on\nthe national ritual, and now contrasts it with the service of God in\npublic life--the relief of the poor, the discharge of justice. But\nhe does not begin with this. The group opens with an elegy, which\nbewails the nation as already fallen. It is always difficult to mark\nwhere the style of a prophet passes from rhythmical prose into what\nwe may justly call a metrical form. But in this short wail, we catch\nthe well-known measure of the Hebrew dirge; not so artistic as in\nlater poems, yet with at least the characteristic couplet of a long\nand a short line.\n\n_Hear this word which I lift up against you--a Dirge, O house of\nIsrael_:--\n\n _Fallen, no more shall she rise,_\n _Virgin of Israel!_\n _Flung down on her own ground,_\n _No one to raise her!_\n\nThe _Virgin_, which with Isaiah is a standing title for Jerusalem and\noccasionally used of other cities, is here probably the whole nation\nof Northern Israel. The explanation follows. It is War. _For thus\nsaith the Lord Jehovah: The city that goeth forth a thousand shall\nhave an hundred left; and she that goeth forth an hundred shall have\nleft ten for the house of Israel._\n\nBut judgment is not yet irrevocable. There break forthwith the only\ntwo promises which lighten the lowering darkness of the book. Let the\npeople turn to Jehovah Himself--and that means let them turn from the\nritual, and instead of it purge their civic life, restore justice in\ntheir courts and help the poor. For God and moral good are one. It\nis _seek Me and ye shall live_, and _seek good and ye shall live_.\nOmitting for the present all argument as to whether the interruption\nof praise to the power of Jehovah be from Amos or another, we read\nthe whole oracle as follows.\n\n_Thus saith Jehovah to the house of Israel: Seek Me and live. But\nseek not Bethel, and come not to Gilgal, and to Beersheba pass not\nover_--to come to Beersheba one had to cross all Judah. _For Gilgal\nshall taste the gall of exile_--it is not possible except in this\nclumsy way to echo the prophet's play upon words, \"Ha-Gilgal galoh\nyigleh\"--_and Bethel_, God's house, _shall become an idolatry_. This\nrendering, however, scarcely gives the rude force of the original;\nfor the word rendered idolatry, Aven, means also falsehood and\nperdition, so that we should not exaggerate the antithesis if we\nemployed a phrase which once was not vulgar: _And Bethel, house of\nGod, shall go to the devil!_[301] The epigram was the more natural\nthat near Bethel, on a site now uncertain, but close to the edge\nof the desert to which it gave its name, there lay from ancient\ntimes a village actually called Beth-Aven, however the form may\nhave risen. And we shall find Hosea stereotyping this epigram of\nAmos, and calling the sanctuary Beth-Aven oftener than he calls it\nBeth-El.[302] _Seek ye Jehovah and live,_ he begins again, _lest He\nbreak forth like fire, O house of Joseph, and it consume and there\nbe none to quench at Bethel._[303] ...[304] _He that made the Seven\nStars and Orion,_[305] _that turneth the murk_[306] _into morning,\nand day He darkeneth to night, that calleth for the waters of the\nsea and poureth them out on the face of the earth--Jehovah His Name.\nHe it is that flasheth out ruin_[307] _on strength, and bringeth\ndown_[308] _destruction on the fortified._ This rendering of the\nlast verse is uncertain, and rightly suspected, but there is no\nalternative so probable, and it returns to the keynote from which the\npassage started, that God should break forth like fire.\n\nAh, _they that turn justice to wormwood, and abase_[309]\n_righteousness to the earth! They hate him that reproveth in the\ngate_--in an Eastern city both the law-court and place of the popular\ncouncil--_and him that speaketh sincerely they abhor_. So in the\nEnglish mystic's Vision Peace complains of Wrong:--\n\n \"I dar noughte for fere of hym \u00b7 fyghte ne chyde.\"[310]\n\n_Wherefore, because ye trample on the weak and take from him a present\nof corn,_[311] _ye have built houses of ashlar,_[312] _but ye shall not\ndwell in them; vineyards for pleasure have ye planted, but ye shall\nnot drink of their wine. For I know how many are your crimes, and\nhow forceful_[313] _your sins--ye that browbeat the righteous, take\nbribes, and bring down the poor in the gate! Therefore the prudent in\nsuch a time is dumb, for an evil time is it_ indeed.\n\n_Seek good and not evil, that ye may live, and Jehovah God of Hosts be\nwith you, as ye say_ He is. _Hate evil and love good; and in the gate\nset justice on her feet again--peradventure Jehovah God of Hosts may\nhave pity on the remnant of Joseph._ If in the Book of Amos there be\nany passages, which, to say the least, do not now lie in their proper\nplaces, this is one of them. For, firstly, while it regards the nation\nas still responsible for the duties of government, it recognises them\nas reduced to a remnant. To find such a state of affairs we have to\ncome down to the years subsequent to 734, when Tiglath-Pileser swept\ninto captivity all Gilead and Galilee--that is, two-thirds, in bulk,\nof the territory of Northern Israel--but left Ephraim untouched. In\nanswer to this, it may, of course, be pointed out that in thus calling\nthe people to repentance, so that a remnant might be saved, Amos may\nhave been contemplating a disaster still future, from which, though\nit was inevitable, God might be moved to spare a remnant.[314] That\nis very true. But it does not meet this further difficulty, that the\nverses (14, 15) plainly make interruption between the end of ver. 13\nand the beginning of ver. 16; and that the initial _therefore_ of the\nlatter verse, while it has no meaning in its present sequence, becomes\nnatural and appropriate when made to follow immediately on ver. 13. For\nall these reasons, then, I take vv. 14 and 15 as a parenthesis, whether\nfrom Amos himself or from a later writer who can tell? But it ought\nto be kept in mind that in other prophetic writings where judgment\nis very severe, we have some proof of the later insertion of calls to\nrepentance, by way of mitigation.\n\nVer. 13 had said the time was so evil that the prudent man kept\nsilence. All the more must the Lord Himself speak, as ver. 16 now\nproclaims. _Therefore thus saith Jehovah, God of Hosts,_[315] _Lord:\nOn all open ways lamentation, and in all streets they shall be\nsaying, Ah woe! Ah woe! And in all vineyards lamentation,_[316] _and\nthey shall call the ploughman to wailing and to lamentation them\nthat are skilful in dirges_--town and country, rustic and artist\nalike--_for I shall pass through thy midst, saith Jehovah._ It is\nthe solemn formula of the Great Passover, when Egypt was filled with\nwailing and there were dead in every house.\n\nThe next verse starts another, but a kindred, theme. As blind as\nwas Israel's confidence in ritual, so blind was their confidence in\ndogma, and the popular dogma was that of the _Day of Jehovah_.\n\nAll popular hopes expect their victory to come in a single sharp\ncrisis--a day. And again, the day of any one means either the day he\nhas appointed, or the day of his display and triumph. So Jehovah's\nday meant to the people the day of His judgment, or of His triumph:\nHis triumph in war over their enemies, His judgment upon the heathen.\nBut Amos, whose keynote has been that judgment begins at home, cries\nwoe upon such hopes, and tells his people that for them the day of\nJehovah is not victory, but rather insidious, importunate, inevitable\ndeath. And this he describes as a man who has lived, alone with wild\nbeasts, from the jungles of the Jordan, where the lions lurk, to the\nhuts of the desert infested by snakes.\n\n_Woe unto them that long for the day of Jehovah! What have you to do\nwith the day of Jehovah? It is darkness, and not light. As when a man\nfleeth from the face of a lion, and a bear falls upon him; and he comes\ninto his home_,[317] _and_, breathless, _leans his hand upon the wall,\nand a serpent bites him._ And then, as if appealing to Heaven for\nconfirmation: Is it not so? _Is it not darkness, the day of Jehovah,\nand not light? storm darkness, and not a ray of light upon it?_\n\nThen Amos returns to the worship, that nurse of their vain hopes,\nthat false prophet of peace, and he hears God speak more strongly\nthan ever of its futility and hatefulness.\n\n_I hate, I loathe your feasts, and I will not smell the savour of your\ngatherings to sacrifice._ For with pagan folly they still believed that\nthe smoke of their burnt-offerings went up to heaven and flattered the\nnostrils of Deity. How ingrained was this belief may be judged by us\nfrom the fact that the terms of it had to be adopted by the apostles\nof a spiritual religion, if they would make themselves understood, and\nare now the metaphors of the sacrifices of the Christian heart.[318]\n_Though ye bring to Me burnt-offerings and your meal-offerings I will\nnot be pleased, or your thank-offerings of fatted calves, I will not\nlook at them. Let cease from Me the noise of thy songs; to the playing\nof thy viols I will not listen. But let justice roll on like water, and\nrighteousness like an unfailing stream._\n\nThen follows the remarkable appeal from the habits of this age\nto those of the times of Israel's simplicity. _Was it flesh- or\nmeal-offerings that ye brought Me in the wilderness, forty years,\nO house of Israel?_[319] That is to say, at the very time when God\nmade Israel His people, and led them safely to the promised land--the\ntime when of all others He did most for them--He was not moved to\nsuch love and deliverance by the propitiatory bribes, which this\ngeneration imagine to be so availing and indispensable. Nay, those\nstill shall not avail, for exile from the land shall now as surely\ncome in spite of them, as the possession of the land in old times\ncame without them. This at least seems to be the drift of the very\nobscure verse which follows, and is the unmistakable statement of the\nclose of the oracle. _But ye shall lift up ... your king and ... your\ngod, images which you have made for yourselves;_[320] _and I will\ncarry you away into exile far beyond Damascus, saith Jehovah--God of\nHosts is His Name!_[321] So this chapter closes like the previous,\nwith the marshalling of God's armies. But as there His hosts were\nthe movements of Nature and the Great Stars, so here they are the\nnations of the world. By His rule of both He is the God of Hosts.\n\n\n 3. \"AT EASE IN ZION.\"\n\n AMOS vi.\n\nThe evil of the national worship was the false political confidence\nwhich it engendered. Leaving the ritual alone, Amos now proceeds to\nassault this confidence. We are taken from the public worship of\nthe people to the private banquets of the rich, but again only in\norder to have their security and extravagance contrasted with the\npestilence, the war and the captivity, that are rapidly approaching.\n\n_Woe unto them that are at ease in Zion_[322]--it is a proud\nand overweening ease which the word expresses--_and that trust\nin the mount of Samaria! Men of mark of the first of the\npeoples_--ironically, for that is Israel's opinion of itself--_and\nto them do the house of Israel resort!_...[323] _Ye that put\noff the day of calamity_[324] _and draw near the sessions of\ninjustice_[325]--an epigram and proverb, for it is the universal\nway of men to wish and fancy far away the very crisis that their\nsins are hastening on. Isaiah described this same generation as\ndrawing iniquity with cords of hypocrisy, and sin as it were\nwith a cart-rope! _That lie on ivory diwans and sprawl on their\ncouches_--another luxurious custom, which filled this rude shepherd\nwith contempt--_and eat lambs from the flock and calves from the\nmidst of the stall_[326]--that is, only the most delicate of\nmeats--_who prate_ or _purr_ or _babble to the sound of the viol,\nand as if they were David_ himself _invent for them instruments of\nsong;_[327] _who drink wine by ewerfuls--waterpotfuls--and anoint\nwith the finest of oil--yet never do they grieve at the havoc of\nJoseph!_ The havoc is the moral havoc, for the social structure of\nIsrael is obviously still secure.[328] The rich are indifferent to\nit; they have wealth, art, patriotism, religion, but neither heart\nfor the poverty nor conscience for the sin of their people. We know\ntheir kind! They are always with us, who live well and imagine they\nare proportionally clever and refined. They have their political\nzeal, will rally to an election when the interests of their class\nor their trade is in danger. They have a robust and exuberant\npatriotism, talk grandly of commerce, empire and the national\ndestiny; but for the real woes and sores of the people, the poverty,\nthe overwork, the drunkenness, the dissoluteness, which more affect a\nnation's life than anything else, they have no pity and no care.\n\n_Therefore now_--the double initial of judgment--_shall they go into\nexile at the head of the exiles, and stilled shall be the revelry of\nthe dissolute_--literally _the sprawlers_, as in ver. 4, but used\nhere rather in the moral than in the physical sense. _Sworn hath the\nLord Jehovah by Himself--'tis the oracle of Jehovah God of Hosts: I\nam loathing_[329] _the pride of Jacob, and his palaces do I hate, and\nI will pack up a city and its fulness._[330]... _For, behold, Jehovah\nis commanding, and He will smite the great house into ruins and the\nsmall house into splinters._ The collapse must come, postpone it as\ntheir fancy will, for it has been worked for and is inevitable. How\ncould it be otherwise? _Shall horses run on a cliff, or the sea be\nploughed by oxen_[331]--_that ye should turn justice to poison and\nthe fruit of righteousness to wormwood! Ye that exult in Lo-Debar\nand say, By our own strength have we taken to ourselves \u1e32arnaim._ So\nGr\u00e4tz rightly reads the verse. The Hebrew text and all the versions\ntake these names as if they were common nouns--Lo-Debar, _a thing\nof nought_; \u1e32arnaim, _a pair of horns_--and doubtless it was just\nbecause of this possible play upon their names, that Amos selected\nthese two out of all the recent conquests of Israel. Karnaim, in\nfull Ashteroth Karnaim, _Astarte of Horns_, was that immemorial\nfortress and sanctuary which lay out upon the great plateau of Bashan\ntowards Damascus; so obvious and cardinal a site that it appears\nin the sacred history both in the earliest recorded campaign in\nAbraham's time and in one of the latest under the Maccabees.[332]\nLo-Debar was of Gilead, and probably lay on that last rampart of\nthe province northward, overlooking the Yarmuk, a strategical point\nwhich must have often been contested by Israel and Aram, and with\nwhich no other Old Testament name has been identified.[333] These two\nfortresses, with many others, Israel had lately taken from Aram; but\nnot, as they boasted, _by their own strength_. It was only Aram's\npre-occupation with Assyria now surgent on the northern flank,\nwhich allowed Israel these easy victories. And this same northern\nfoe would soon overwhelm themselves. _For, behold, I am to raise\nup against you, O house of Israel--'tis the oracle of Jehovah God\nof the hosts_[334]--_a Nation, and they shall oppress you from the\nEntrance of Hamath to the Torrent of the 'Arabah._ Every one knows\nthe former, the Pass between the Lebanons, at whose mouth stands Dan,\nnorthern limit of Israel; but it is hard to identify the latter. If\nAmos means to include Judah, we should have expected the Torrent of\nEgypt, the present Wady el 'Arish; but the Wady of the 'Arabah may\nbe a corresponding valley in the eastern watershed issuing in the\n'Arabah. If Amos threatens only the Northern Kingdom, he intends some\nwady running down to that Sea of the 'Arabah, the Dead Sea, which is\nelsewhere given as the limit of Israel.[335]\n\nThe Assyrian flood, then, was about to break, and the oracles close\nwith the hopeless prospect of the whole land submerged beneath it.\n\n\n 4. A FRAGMENT FROM THE PLAGUE.\n\nIn the above exposition we have omitted two very curious verses, 9\nand 10, which are held by some critics to interrupt the current of\nthe chapter, and to reflect an entirely different kind of calamity\nfrom that which it predicts. I do not think these critics right, for\nreasons I am about to give; but the verses are so remarkable that it is\nmost convenient to treat them by themselves apart from the rest of the\nchapter. Here they are, with the verse immediately in front of them.\n\n_I am loathing the pride of Jacob, and his palaces I hate. And I\nwill give up a city and its fulness_ to ...(perhaps _siege_ or\n_pestilence_?). _And it shall come to pass, if there be left ten men\nin one house, and they die,_[336] ... _that his cousin_[337] _and\nthe man to burn him shall lift him to bring the body_[338] _out of\nthe house, and they shall say to one who is in the recesses of the\nhouse_,[339] _Are there any more with thee? And he shall say, Not one\n... and they shall say, Hush!_ (_for one must not make mention of the\nname of Jehovah_).\n\nThis grim fragment is obscure in its relation to the context. But\nthe death of even so large a household as ten--the funeral left to a\ndistant relation--the disposal of the bodies by burning instead of\nthe burial customary among the Hebrews[340]--sufficiently reflect\nthe kind of calamity. It is a weird little bit of memory, the\nrecollection of an eye-witness, from one of those great pestilences\nwhich, during the first half of the eighth century, happened not\nseldom in Western Asia.[341] But what does it do here? Wellhausen\nsays that there is nothing to lead up to the incident; that before\nit the chapter speaks, not of pestilence, but only of political\ndestruction by an enemy. This is not accurate. The phrase immediately\npreceding may mean either _I will shut up a city and its fulness_,\nin which case a siege is meant, and a siege was the possibility\nboth of famine and pestilence; or _I will give up the city and its\nfulness_..., in which case a word or two may have been dropped,\nas words have undoubtedly been dropped at the end of the next\nverse, and one ought perhaps to add _to the pestilence_.[342] The\nlatter alternative is the more probable, and this may be one of the\npassages, already alluded to,[343] in which the want of connection\nwith the preceding verses is to be explained, not upon the favourite\ntheory that there has been a violent intrusion into the text, but\nupon the too much neglected hypothesis that some words have been lost.\n\nThe uncertainty of the text, however, does not weaken the impression\nof its ghastly realism: the unclean and haunted house; the kinsman\nand the body-burner afraid to search through the infected rooms,\nand calling in muffled voice to the single survivor crouching in\nsome far corner of them, _Are there any more with thee?_ his reply,\n_None_--himself the next! Yet these details are not the most weird.\nOver all hangs a terror darker than the pestilence. _Shall there be\nevil in a city and Jehovah not have done it?_ Such, as we have heard\nfrom Amos, was the settled faith of the age. But in times of woe it\nwas held with an awful and a craven superstition. The whole of life\nwas believed to be overhung with loose accumulations of Divine anger.\nAnd as in some fatal hollow in the high Alps, where any noise may\nbring down the impending masses of snow, and the fearful traveller\nhurries along in silence, so the men of that superstitious age\nfeared, when an evil like the plague was imminent, even to utter the\nDeity's name, lest it should loosen some avalanche of His wrath. _And\nhe said, Hush! for_, adds the comment, one _must not make mention of\nthe name of Jehovah_.\n\nThis reveals another side of the popular religion which Amos has been\nattacking. We have seen it as the sheer superstition of routine;\nbut we now know that it was a routine broken by panic. The God who\nin times of peace was propitiated by regular supplies of savoury\nsacrifice and flattery, is conceived, when His wrath is roused and\nimminent, as kept quiet only by the silence of its miserable objects.\nThe false peace of ritual is tempered by panic.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[268] See above, pp. 82 ff. and pp. 89 ff.\n\n[269] With the LXX. \u05d1\u05d0\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8 for \u05d1\u05d0\u05e9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d3.\n\n[270] \u05e9\u05d3 (ver. 10).\n\n[271] Singular as in LXX., and not plural as in the M.T. and English\nversions.\n\n[272] Juvenal, _Satires_, I.\n\n[273] _Vision of Piers Plowman._ Burgages=tenements.\n\n[274] Or _The Enemy, and that right round the Land!_\n\n[275] _In Damascus on a couch: on a Damascus couch: on a\nDamascus-cloth couch:_ or _Damascus-fashion on a couch_--alternatives\nall equally probable and equally beyond proof. The text is very\ndifficult, nor do the versions give help. (1) The consonants of\nthe word before _a couch_ spell _in Damascus_, and so the LXX.\ntake it. This would be in exact parallel to the _in Samaria_ of\nthe previous half of the clause. But although Jeroboam II. is\nsaid to have recovered Damascus (2 Kings xiv. 28), this is not\nnecessarily the town itself, of whose occupation by Israel we have\nno evidence, while Amos always assumes it to be Aramean, and here\nhe is addressing Israelites. Still retaining the name of the city,\nwe can take it with _couch_ as parallel, not to _in Samaria_, but\nto _on the side of a diwan_; in that case the meaning may have been\n_a Damascus couch_ (though as the two words stand it is impossible\nto parse them, and Gen. xv. 2 cannot be quoted in support of this,\nfor it is too uncertain itself, being possibly a gloss, though it\nis curious that as the two passages run the name Damascus should be\nin the same strange grammatical conjunction in each), or possibly\n_Damascus-fashion on a couch_, which (if the first half of the\nclause, as some maintain, refers to some delicate or affected\nposture then come into fashion) is the most probable rendering. (2)\nThe Massoretes have pointed, not _bedammeseq_ = _in Damascus_, but\n_bedemesheq_, a form not found elsewhere, which some (Ges., Hitz.,\nEw., Rev. Eng. Ver., etc.) take to mean some Damascene stuff (as\nperhaps our Damask and the Arabic _dimshaq_ originally meant, though\nthis is not certain), _e.g._ _silk_ or _velvet_ or _cushions_. (3)\nOthers rearrange the text. _E.g._ Hoffmann (_Z. A. T. W._, III. 102)\ntakes the whole clause away from ver. 12 and attaches it to ver. 13,\nreading _O those who sit in Samaria on the edge of the diwan, and in\nDamascus on a couch, hearken and testify against the house of Jacob_.\nBut, as Wellhausen points out, those addressed in ver. 13 are the\nsame as those addressed in ver. 9. Wellhausen prefers to believe that\nafter the words _children of Israel_, which end a sentence, something\nhas fallen out. The LXX. translator, who makes several blunders in\nthe course of this chapter, instead of translating \u05e2\u05e8\u05e9\u05c2 couch, the\nlast word of the verse, merely transliterates it into \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2!!\n\n[276] Cf. vi. 4: _that lie on ivory diwans and sprawl on their\ncouches_.\n\n[277] Van Lennep, _Bible Lands and Customs_, p. 460.\n\n[278] See p. 205, _n._ 4.\n\n[279] The words for hook in Hebrew--the two used above, \u05e6\u05b4\u05e0\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea and\n\u05e1\u05b4\u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea; and a third, \u05d7\u05d5\u05b9\u05d7\u05b7--all mean originally _thorns_, doubtless\nthe first hooks of primitive man; but by this time they would signify\nmetal hooks--a change analogous to the English word _pen_.\n\n[280] Cf. Isa. xxxvii. 29; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11. On the use\nfish-hooks, Job xl. 26 (Heb.), xli. 2 (Eng.); Ezek. xxix. 4.\n\n[281] The verb, which in the text is active, must be taken in the\npassive. The word not translated above is \u05d4\u05b7\u05d4\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 _unto the\nHarm\u00f4n_, which name does not occur elsewhere. LXX. read \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u1f78 \u1fec\u03bf\u03bc\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd, which Ewald renders _ye shall cast the Rimmon to the\nmountain_ (cf. Isa. ii. 20), and he takes Rimmon to be the Syrian\ngoddess of love. Steiner (quoted by Wellhausen) renders _ye shall\nbe cast out to Hadad Rimmon_, that is, _violated as_ \u05e7\u05d3\u05e9\u05b9\u05d5\u05ea Hitzig\nseparates \u05d4\u05d4\u05e8 from \u05de\u05d5\u05e0\u05d4, which he takes as contracted from \u05de\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4, and\nrenders _ye shall fling yourselves out on the mountains as a refuge_.\nBut none of these is satisfactory.\n\n[282] I have already treated this passage in connection with Isaiah's\nprophecies on women in the volume on Isaiah i.-xxxix. (Expositor's\nBible), Chap. XVI.\n\n[283] Cf. chap. vi. 4.\n\n[284] v. 11.\n\n[285] vi. 8, 11.\n\n[286] Cf. what was said on building above, p. 33.\n\n[287] See p. 141.\n\n[288] v. 26.\n\n[289] v. 25.\n\n[290] Another proof of how the spirit of ritualism tends to absorb\nmorality.\n\n[291] Ver. 4: cf. 1 Sam. i.; Deut. xiv. 28. Wellhausen offers\nanother exegesis: Amos is describing exactly what took place at\nBethel--sacrifice on the morning, _i.e._ next to the day of their\narrival, tithes on the third day thereafter.\n\n[292] See Wellhausen's note, and compare Lev. vii. 13.\n\n[293] Matt. vi. 2.\n\n[294] \u05d2\u05b6\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05dd: _Hist. Geog._, p. 64. It is interesting that this\nyear (1895) the same thing was threatened, according to a report in\nthe _Mittheilungen u. Nachrichten des D.P.V._, p. 44: \"Nachdem es\nim December einigemal recht stark geregnet hatte besonders an der\nMeeresk\u00fcste ist seit kurz vor Weihnachten das Wetter immer sch\u00f6n u.\nmild geblieben, u. wenn nicht weiterer Regen f\u00e4llt, so wird grosser\nWassermangel entstehen denn bis jetzt (16 Febr.) hat Niemand Cisterne\nvoll.\" The harvest is in April-May.\n\n[295] Or in the fashion of Egypt, _i.e._ a thoroughly Egyptian\nplague; so called, not with reference to the plagues of Egypt, but\nbecause that country was always the nursery of the pestilence. See\n_Hist. Geog._, p. 157 ff. Note how it comes with war.\n\n[296] Apertly, openly.\n\n[297] Men.\n\n[298] Undo.\n\n[299] _Hist. Geog._, Chap. iii., pp. 73 f.\n\n[300] This and similar passages are dealt with by themselves in Chap.\nXI.\n\n[301] Cf. LXX.: \u0392\u03b1\u03b9\u03b8\u1f74\u03bb \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1.\n\n[302] The name Bethel is always printed as one word in our Hebrew\ntexts. See Baer on Gen. xii. 8.\n\n[303] Wellhausen thinks _at Bethel_ not genuine. But Bethel has been\nsingled out as the place where the people put their false confidence,\nand is naturally named here. LXX.: \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u1ff3 \u1f38\u03c3\u03c1\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb.\n\n[304] Ver. 7 is plainly out of place here, as the LXX. perceived, and\ntherefore tried to give it another rendering which would make it seem\nin place: \u1f41 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f55\u03c8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bc\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd.\nSo Ewald removed it to between vv. 9 and 10. There it begins well\nanother oracle; and it may be that we should insert before it \u05d4\u05d5\u05d9, as\nin vv. 18, vi. 1.\n\n[305] Literally _the Group_ and _the Giant_. \u05db\u05d9\u05de\u05d4, Kimah, signifies\ngroup, or little heap. Here it is rendered by Aq. and at Job ix. 9\nby LXX. \u1f08\u03c1\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2; and here by Theod. and in Job xxxviii. 31, _the\nchain_, or _cluster, of the group_ \u03a0\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2. The Targ. and Pesh. always\ngive it as Kima, _i.e._ Pleiades. And this is the rendering of most\nmoderns. But Stern takes it for Sirius with its constellation of the\nGreat Dog, for the reason that this is the brightest of all stars, and\ntherefore a more suitable fellow for Orion than the dimmer Pleiades can\nbe. \u05db\u05e1\u05d9\u05dc, the Fool or Giant, is the Hebrew name of \u1f68\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, by which the\nLXX. render it. Targum \u05e0\u05d9\u05e4\u05dc\u05d0. To the ancient world the constellation\nlooked like the figure of a giant fettered in heaven, \"a fool so far as\nhe trusted in his bodily strength\" (Dillmann). In later times he was\ncalled Nimrod. His early setting came at the time of the early rains.\nCf. with the passage Job ix. 9 and xxxviii. 31.\n\n[306] The abstract noun meaning _deep shadow_, LXX. \u03c3\u03ba\u03b9\u03ac, and\nrendered _shadow of death_ by many modern versions.\n\n[307] So LXX., reading \u05e9\u05c1\u05d1\u05e8 for \u05e9\u05c1\u05d3; it improves the rhythm, and\nescapes the awkward repetition of \u05e9\u05c1\u05d3.\n\n[308] So LXX.\n\n[309] Possible alternative: _make stagnant_.\n\n[310] _Vision of Piers Plowman_, Passus IV., l. 52. Cf. the whole\npassage.\n\n[311] Uncertain; Hitzig takes it as the apodosis of the previous\nclause: _Ye shall have to take from him a present of corn_, _i.e._ as\nalms.\n\n[312] See above, p. 33.\n\n[313] Cf. \"Pecca fortiter.\"\n\n[314] As, for instance, the prophet looks forward to in iii. 12.\n\n[315] _God of Hosts_, perhaps an intrusion (?) between \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9 and \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4.\n\n[316] I have ventured to rearrange the order of the clauses, which in\nthe original is evidently dislocated.\n\n[317] Lit. _the house_.\n\n[318] Eph. v. 2; etc.\n\n[319] No one doubts that this verse is interrogative. But the\nAuthorised Eng. Ver. puts it in a form--_Have ye brought unto Me?_\netc.--which implies blame that they did not do so. Ewald was the\nfirst to see that, as rendered above, an appeal to the forty years\nwas the real intention of the verse. So after him nearly all critics,\nalso the Revised Eng. Ver.: _Did ye bring unto Me?_ On the whole\nquestion of the possibility of such an appeal see above, pp. 100\nff., and cf. Jer. vii. 22, which distinctly declares that in the\nwilderness God prescribed no ritual to Israel.\n\n[320] Ver. 26 is very difficult, for both the text and the rendering\nof all the possible alternatives of it are quite uncertain. (1) As to\nthe _text_, the present division into words must be correct; at least\nno other is possible. But the present order of the words is obviously\nwrong. For _your images_ is evidently described by the relative\nclause _which you have made_, and ought to stand next it. What then\nis to be done with the two words that at present come between--_star\nof your god_? Are they both a mere gloss, as Robertson Smith holds,\nand therefore to be struck out? or should they precede the pair of\nwords, \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d9\u05db\u05dd \u05db\u05d9\u05d5\u05df, which they now follow? This is the order of\nthe text which the LXX. translator had before him, only for \u05db\u05d5\u05df he\nmisread \u05e8\u05b5\u05d9\u05e4\u05b8\u05df or \u05e8\u05b5\u05d9\u05d5\u05b8\u05df: \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039c\u03c9\u03bb\u1f78\u03c7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u1f04\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u1fec\u03b1\u03b9\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd [\u1fec\u03b5\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd, Q], \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd [om. AQ]\n\u03bf\u1f53\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2. This arrangement has the further evidence in\nits favour, that it brings _your god_ into proper parallel with _your\nking_. The Hebrew text would then run thus:--\n\n [\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05db\u05dd \u05db\u05d5\u05db\u05d1] \u05d5\u05d0\u05ea \u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05db\u05dd \u05e1\u05db\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05ea \u05d5\u05e0\u05e9\u05d0\u05ea\u05dd\n \u05dc\u05db\u05dd \u05e2\u05e9\u05d9\u05ea\u05dd \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d9\u05db\u05dd \u05db\u05d9\u05d5\u05df\n\n(2) The translation of this text is equally difficult: not in the\nverb \u05d5\u05e0\u05e9\u05d0\u05ea\u05dd, for both the grammar and the argument oblige us to\ntake it as future, _and ye shall lift up_; but in the two words\n\u05e1\u05db\u05d5\u05ea and \u05db\u05d9\u05d5\u05df. Are these common nouns, or proper names of deities\nin apposition to _your king_ and _your god_? The LXX. takes \u05e1\u05db\u05d5\u05ea as\n= _tabernacle_, and \u05db\u05d9\u05d5\u05df as a proper name (Theodotion takes both as\nproper names). The Auth. Eng. Ver. follows the LXX. (except that it\ntakes _king_ for the name _Moloch_). Schrader (_Stud. u. Krit._,\n1874, 324; _K.A.T._, 442 f.) takes them as the consonants of Sakkut,\na name of the Assyrian god Adar, and of Kewan, the Assyrian name for\nthe planet Saturn: _Ye shall take up Sakkut your king and Kewan your\nstar-god, your images which_... Baethgen goes further and takes both\nthe \u05de\u05dc\u05da of \u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05d9\u05db\u05dd and the \u05e6\u05dc\u05dd of \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d9\u05db\u05dd as Moloch and \u1e62elam, proper\nnames, in combination with Sakkut and Kewan (_Beitr. z. Sem. Rel._,\n239). Now it is true that the Second Book of Kings implies that the\nworship of the host of heaven existed in Samaria before its fall (2\nKings xvii. 16), but the introduction into Samaria of Assyrian gods\n(among them Adar) is placed by it after the fall (2 Kings xvii. 31),\nand besides, Amos does not elsewhere speak of the worship of foreign\ngods, nor is the mention of them in any way necessary to the argument\nhere. On the contrary, even if Amos were to mention the worship of\nidols by Israel, would he have selected at this point the Assyrian\nones? (See, however, Tiele, _Revue de l'Histoire des Religions_,\nIII., p. 211, who makes Koun and the planet Keiwan purely Ph\u0153nician\ndeities.) Some critics take \u05e1\u05db\u05d5\u05ea and \u05db\u05d9\u05d5\u05df as common nouns in the\nconstruct state. So Ewald, and so most recently Robertson Smith\n(_O.T.J.C._, 2): _the shrine of your king and the stand of your\nimages_. This is more in harmony with the absence from the rest of\nAmos of any hint as to the worship of idols, but an objection to it,\nand a very strong one, is that the alleged common nouns are not found\nelsewhere in Hebrew. In view of this conflicting evidence it is best\ntherefore to leave the words untranslated, as in the text above. It\nis just possible that they may themselves be later insertions, for\nthe verse would read very well without them: _And ye shall lift up\nyour king and your images which you have made to yourselves_.\n\n[321] The last clause is peculiar. Two clauses seem to have run into\none--_saith Jehovah, God of Hosts_, and _God of Hosts is His Name_.\nThe word \u05e9\u05de\u05d5 = _His Name_, may have been added to give the oracle the\nsame conclusion as the oracle at the end of the preceding chapter;\nand it is not to be overlooked that \u05e9\u05de\u05d5 at the end of a clause\ndoes not occur elsewhere in the book outside the three questioned\nDoxologies iv. 13, v. 8, ix. 6. Further, see below, pp. 204 f.\n\n[322] _In Zion_: \"very suspicious,\" Cornill. But see pp. 135 f.\n\n[323] I remove ver. 2 to a note, not that I am certain that it is\nnot by Amos--who can be dogmatic on such a point?--but because the\ntext of it, the place which it occupies, and its relation to the\nfacts of current history, all raise doubts. Moreover it is easily\ndetached from the context, without disturbing the flow of the\nchapter, which indeed runs more equably without it. The Massoretic\ntext gives: _Pass over to Calneh, and see; and go thence to Hamath\nRabbah, and come down to Gath of the Philistines: are they better\nthan these kingdoms, or is their territory larger than yours?_\nPresumably _these_ _kingdoms_ are Judah and Israel. But that can\nonly mean that Israel is the best of the peoples, a statement out\nof harmony with the irony of ver. 1, and impossible in the mouth of\nAmos. Geiger, therefore, proposes to read: \"Are you better than these\nkingdoms--_i.e._ Calneh, Hamath, Gath--or is your territory larger\nthan theirs?\" But this is also unlikely, for Israel's territory was\nmuch larger than Gath's. Besides, the question would have force only\nif Calneh, Hamath and Gath had already fallen. Gath had, but it is\nat least very questionable whether Hamath had. Therefore Schrader\n(_K.A.T._, 444) rejects the whole verse; and Kuenen agrees that if we\nare to understand Assyrian conquests, it is hardly possible to retain\nthe verses. Bickell's first argument against the verse, that it does\nnot fit into the metrical system of Amos vi. 1-7, is precarious; his\nsecond, that it disturbs the grammar, which it makes to jump suddenly\nfrom the third person in ver. 1 to the second in ver. 2, and back to\nthe third in ver. 3, is not worth anything, for such a jump occurs\nwithin ver. 3 itself.\n\n[324] Davidson, _Syntax_, \u00a7 100, R. 5.\n\n[325] \u05d7\u05de\u05dd \u05e9\u05c1\u05d1\u05ea; LXX. \u03c3\u03b1\u03b2\u03b2\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd, on which hint Hoffmann renders\nthe verse: \"you that daily demand the tribute of evil (cf. Ezek.\nxvi. 33), and every Sabbath extort by violence.\" But this is both\nunnecessary and opposed to viii. 5, which tells us no trade was done\non the Sabbath. \u05e9\u05d1\u05ea is to be taken in the common sense of sitting\nin judgment (rather than with Wellhausen), in the sense of the\nenthronement of wrong-doing.\n\n[326] To this day, in some parts of Palestine, the general fold into\nwhich the cattle are shut contains a portion railed off for calves\nand lambs (cf. Dr. M. Blanckenhorn of Erlangen in the _Mittheilungen\nu. Nachrichten_ of the D.P.V., 1895, p. 37, with a sketch). It must\nbe this to which Amos refers.\n\n[327] Or perhaps _melodies_, _airs_.\n\n[328] Of course, it is possible that here again, as in v. 15 and 16,\nwe have prophecy later than the disaster of 734, when Tiglath-Pileser\nmade a great _breach_ or _havoc_ in the body politic of Israel by\ntaking Gilead and Galilee captive. But this is scarcely probable,\nfor Amos almost everywhere lays stress upon the moral corruption of\nIsrael, as her real and essential danger.\n\n[329] \u05de\u05ea\u05d0\u05d1 for \u05de\u05ea\u05e2\u05d1.\n\n[330] Some words must have dropped out here. For these and the\nfollowing verses 9 and 10 on the pestilence see pp. 178 ff.\n\n[331] So Michaelis, \u05d9\u05b8\u05dd \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d1\u05b8\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8 for \u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd.\n\n[332] Gen. xiv. 5; 1 Macc. v. In the days of Eusebius and Jerome (4th\ncentury) there were two places of the name: one of them doubtless the\npresent Tell Ashtara south of El-Merkez, the other distant from that\nfourteen Roman miles.\n\n[333] Along this ridge ran, and still runs, one of the most important\nhighways to the East, that from Beth-Shan by Gadera to Edrei. About\nseven miles east from Gadera lies a village, Ibdar, \"with a good\nspring and some ancient remains\" (Schumacher, _N. Ajlun_, 101).\nLo-Debar is mentioned in 2 Sam. ix. 45; xvii. 27; and doubtless the\nLidebir of Josh. xiii. 26 on the north border of Gilead is the same.\n\n[334] With the article, an unusual form of the title. LXX. here\n\u03ba\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n[335] 2 Kings xiv. 25. The Torrent of the 'Arabah can scarcely be\nthe Torrent of the 'Arabim of Isa. xv. 7 for the latter was outside\nIsrael's territory, and the border between Moab and Edom. The LXX.\nrender _Torrent of the West_, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n[336] Here there is evidently a gap in the text. The LXX. insert \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c6\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f41\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9; perhaps therefore the text originally\nran _and the survivors die_.\n\n[337] Or _uncle_--that is, a distant relative, presumably because all\nthe near ones are dead.\n\n[338] Literally _bones_.\n\n[339] LXX. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9: evidently in ignorance of the reading or\nthe meaning.\n\n[340] The burning of a body was regarded, as we have seen (Amos\nii. 1), as a great sacrilege; and was practised, outside times of\npestilence only in cases of great criminals: Lev. xx. 14; xxi. 9;\nJosh. vii. 25. Doughty (_Arabia Deserta_, 68) mentions a case in\nwhich, in Medina, a Persian pilgrim was burned to death by an angry\ncrowd for defiling Mohammed's tomb.\n\n[341] The Assyrian inscriptions record at least three--in 803, 765, 759.\n\n[342] As in Psalm lxxviii. 50. \u05d4\u05b4\u05e1\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05e8, to give up, is so seldom\nused absolutely (Deut. xxxii. 30 is poetry and elliptic) that we may\nwell believe it was followed by words signifying to what the city was\nto be given up.\n\n[343] Pp. 141 f.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER X\n\n _DOOM OR DISCIPLINE?_\n\n AMOS viii. 4-ix.\n\n\nWe now enter the Third Section of the Book of Amos: chaps. vii.-ix.\nAs we have already treated the first part of it--the group of four\nvisions, which probably formed the prophet's discourse at Bethel,\nwith the interlude of his adventure there (vii.-viii. 3)[344]--we may\npass at once to what remains: from viii. 4 to the end of the book.\nThis portion consists of groups of oracles more obscure in their\nrelations to each other than any we have yet studied, and probably\ncontaining a number of verses which are not from Amos himself. They\nopen in a denunciation of the rich, which echoes previous oracles,\nand soon pass to judgments of a kind already threatened, but now with\ngreater relentlessness. Then, just as all is at the darkest, lights\nbreak; exceptions are made; the inevitable captivity is described no\nmore as doom, but as discipline; and, with only this preparation for\na change, we are swept out on a scene, in which, although the land\nis strewn with the ruins that have been threatened, the sunshine of\na new day floods them; the promise of restoration is given; Nature\nherself will be regenerated, and the whole life of Israel planted on\nits own ground again.\n\nWhether it was given to Amos himself to behold this day--whether\nthese last verses of the book were his \"Nunc Dimittis,\" or the hope\nof a later generation, which found his book intolerably severe,\nand mingled with its judgments their own new mercies--we shall try\nto discover further on. Meanwhile there is no doubt that we start\nwith the authentic oracles of the prophet. We know the ring of his\nvoice. To the tyranny of the rich, which he has so often lashed, he\nnow adds the greed and fraud of the traders; and he paints Israel's\ndoom in those shapes of earthquake, eclipse and famine with which\nhis own generation had recently become familiar. Note that in this\nfirst group Amos employs only physical calamities, and says nothing\nof war and captivity. If the standard which we have already applied\nto the growth of his doctrine be correct, these ought therefore to\nbe counted among his earlier utterances. War and captivity follow in\nchap. ix. That is to say, this Third Section follows the same line of\ndevelopment as both the First and the Second.\n\n\n 1. EARTHQUAKE, ECLIPSE AND FAMINE.\n\n AMOS viii. 4-14.\n\n_Hear this, ye who trample the needy, and would put an end to_[345]\n_the lowly of the land, saying, When will the New-Moon be over, that\nwe may sell grain, and the Sabbath, that we may open corn_ (_by\nmaking small the measure, but large the weight, and falsifying the\nfraudulent balances; buying the wretched for silver, and the needy\nfor a pair of shoes!_), _and that we may sell as grain the refuse\nof the corn!_ The parenthesis puzzles, but is not impossible: in\nthe speed of his scorn, Amos might well interrupt the speech of the\nmerchants by these details of their fraud,[346] flinging these in\ntheir teeth as they spoke. The existence at this date of the New-Moon\nand Sabbath as days of rest from business is interesting; but even\nmore interesting is the peril to which they lie open. As in the\ncase of the Nazirites and the prophets, we see how the religious\ninstitutions and opportunities of the people are threatened by\nworldliness and greed. And, as in every other relevant passage of the\nOld Testament, we have the interests of the Sabbath bound up in the\nsame cause with the interests of the poor. The Fourth Commandment\nenforces the day of rest on behalf of the servants and bondsmen. When\na later prophet substitutes for religious fasts the ideals of social\nservice, he weds with the latter the security of the Sabbath from all\nbusiness.[347] So here Amos emphasises that the Sabbath is threatened\nby the same worldliness and love of money which tramples on the\nhelpless. The interests of the Sabbath are the interests of the poor:\nthe enemies of the Sabbath are the enemies of the poor. And all this\nillustrates our Saviour's saying, that _the Sabbath was made for man_.\n\nBut, as in the rest of the book, judgment again follows hard on sin.\n_Sworn hath Jehovah by the pride of Jacob, Never shall I forget their\ndeeds._ It is as before. The chief spring of the prophet's inspiration\nis his burning sense of the personal indignation of God against crimes\nso abominable. God is the God of the poor, and His anger rises, as\nwe see the anger of Christ arise, heavy against their tyrants and\noppressors. Such sins are intolerable to Him. But the feeling of their\nintolerableness is shared by the land itself, the very fabric of\nnature; the earthquake is the proof of it. _For all this shall not the\nland tremble and her every inhabitant mourn? and she shall rise like\nthe Nile in mass, and heave and sink like the Nile of Egypt._[348]\n\nTo the earthquake is added the eclipse: one had happened in 803, and\nanother in 763, the memory of which probably inspired the form of this\npassage. _And it shall be in that day--'tis the oracle of the Lord\nJehovah--that I shall bring down the sun at noon, and cast darkness\non the earth in broad day._[349] _And I will turn your festivals into\nmourning, and all your songs to a dirge. And I will bring up upon all\nloins sackcloth and on every head baldness, and I will make it like the\nmourning for an only son, and the end of it as a bitter day._\n\nBut the terrors of earthquake and eclipse are not sufficient for\ndoom, and famine is drawn upon.\n\n_Lo, days are coming--'tis the oracle of the Lord Jehovah--that I\nwill send famine on the land, not a famine of bread nor a drouth of\nwater, but of hearing the words of Jehovah. And they shall wander\nfrom sea to sea, and from the dark North to the Sunrise shall they\nrun to and fro, to seek the word of Jehovah, and they shall not find\nit; ... who swear by Samaria's Guilt_--the golden calf in the house\nof the kingdom at Bethel[350]--_and say, As liveth thy God, O Dan!\nand, As liveth the way to Beersheba! and they shall fall and not rise\nany more_. I have omitted ver. 13: _in that day shall the fair maids\nfaint and the youths for thirst_; and I append my reasons in a note.\nSome part of the received text must go, for while vv. 11 and 12 speak\nof a spiritual drought, the drought of 13 is physical. And ver. 14\nfollows 12 better than it follows 13. The oaths mentioned by Bethel,\nDan, Beersheba, are not specially those of young men and maidens,\nbut of the whole nation, that run from one end of the land to the\nother, Dan to Beersheba, seeking for some word of Jehovah.[351] One\nof the oaths, _As liveth the way to Beersheba_,[352] is so curious\nthat some have doubted if the text be correct. But strange as it may\nappear to us to speak of the life of the lifeless, this often happens\namong the Semites. To-day Arabs \"swear _wa hy\u00e2t_, 'by the life of,'\neven of things inanimate; 'By the life of this fire, or of this\ncoffee.'\"[353] And as Amos here tells us that the Israelite pilgrims\nswore by the way to Beersheba, so do the Moslems affirm their oaths\nby the sacred way to Mecca.\n\nThus Amos returns to the chief target of his shafts--the senseless,\ncorrupt worship of the national sanctuaries. And this time--perhaps\nin remembrance of how they had silenced the word of God when he\nbrought it home to them at Bethel--he tells Israel that, with all\ntheir running to and fro across the land, to shrine after shrine in\nsearch of the word, they shall suffer from a famine and drouth of\nit. Perhaps this is the most effective contrast in which Amos has\nyet placed the stupid ritualism of his people. With so many things\nto swear by; with so many holy places that once were the homes of\nVision, Abraham's Beersheba, Jacob's Bethel, Joshua's Gilgal--nay,\na whole land over which God's voice had broken in past ages, lavish\nas the rain; with, too, all their assiduity of sacrifice and prayer,\nthey should nevertheless starve and pant for that living word of the\nLord, which they had silenced in His prophet.\n\nThus, men may be devoted to religion, may be loyal to their sacred\ntraditions and institutions, may haunt the holy associations of the\npast and be very assiduous with their ritual--and yet, because of\ntheir worldliness, pride and disobedience, never feel that moral\ninspiration, that clear call to duty, that comfort in pain, that\nhope in adversity, that good conscience at all times, which spring\nup in the heart like living water. Where these be not experienced,\northodoxy, zeal, lavish ritual, are all in vain.\n\n\n 2. NEMESIS.\n\n AMOS ix. 1-6.\n\nThere follows a Vision in Bethel, the opening of which, _I saw\nthe Lord_, immediately recalls the great inauguration of Isaiah.\nHe also _saw the Lord_; but how different the Attitude, how other\nthe Word! To the statesman-prophet the Lord is _enthroned_,\nsurrounded by the court of heaven; and though the temple rocks to\nthe intolerable thunder of their praise, they bring to the contrite\nman beneath the consciousness of a life-long mission. But to Amos\nthe Lord is _standing_ and alone--to this lonely prophet God is\nalways alone--and His message may be summed up in its initial word,\n_Smite_. There--Government: hierarchies of service, embassies,\nclemencies, healings, and though at first devastation, thereafter\nthe indestructible hope of a future. Here--Judgment: that Figure of\nFate which terror's fascinated eye ever sees alone; one final blow\nand irreparable ruin. And so, as with Isaiah we saw how constructive\nprophecy may be, with Amos we behold only the preparatory havoc, the\nlevelling and clearing of the ground of the future.\n\n_I have seen the Lord standing over the Altar, and He said, Smite the\ncapital_--of the pillar--_that the very thresholds_[354] _quake, and\nbreak them on the head of all of them!_ It is a shock that makes the\ntemple reel from roof-tree to basement. The vision seems subsequent\nto the prophet's visit to Bethel; and it gathers his whole attack\non the national worship into one decisive and irreparable blow.\n_The last of them will I slay with the sword: there shall not flee\naway of them one fugitive: there shall not escape of them a_ single\n_survivor!_ Neither hell nor heaven, mountain-top nor sea-bottom,\nshall harbour one of them. _If they break through to Sheol, thence\nshall My hand take them; and if they climb to heaven, thence shall\nI bring them down. If they hide in Carmel's top, thence will I find\nthem out and fetch them; and if they conceal themselves from before\nMine eyes in the bottom of the sea, thence shall I charge the Serpent\nand he shall bite them; and if they go into captivity before their\nfoes_--to Israel as terrible a distance from God's face as Sheol\nitself!--_thence will I charge the sword and it shall slay them; and\nI will set Mine eye upon them for evil and not for good_.\n\nIt is a ruder draft of the Hundred and Thirty-Ninth Psalm; but the\nDivine Pursuer is Nemesis, and not Conscience.\n\n_And the Lord, Jehovah of the Hosts; Who toucheth the earth and it\nmelteth, and all its inhabitants mourn, and it rises like the Nile,\nall of it_ together, _and sinks like the Nile of Egypt; Who buildeth\nHis stories in the heavens, and His vault on the earth He foundeth;\nWho calleth to the waters of the sea and poureth them forth on the\nface of the earth--Jehovah_ of Hosts _is His Name_.[355]\n\n\n 3. THE VOICES OF ANOTHER DAWN.\n\n AMOS ix. 7-15.\n\nAnd now we are come to the part where, as it seems, voices of another\nday mingle with that of Amos, and silence his judgments in the chorus\nof their unbroken hope. At first, however, it is himself without\ndoubt who speaks. He takes up the now familiar truth, that when it\ncomes to judgment for sin, Israel is no dearer to Jehovah than any\nother people of His equal Providence.\n\n_Are ye not unto Me, O children of Israel--'tis the oracle of\nJehovah--just like the children of Kushites?_ mere black folk and far\naway! _Did I not bring up Israel from Egypt, and the Philistines from\nCaphtor, and Aram from \u1e32ir?_ Mark again the universal Providence which\nAmos proclaims: it is the due concomitant of his universal morality.\nOnce for all the religion of Israel breaks from the characteristic\nSemitic belief that gave a god to every people, and limited both his\npower and his interests to that people's territory and fortunes. And\nif we remember how everything spiritual in the religion of Israel,\neverything in its significance for mankind, was rendered possible only\nbecause at this date it broke from and abjured the particularism in\nwhich it had been born, we shall feel some of the Titanic force of the\nprophet, in whom that break was achieved with an absoluteness which\nleaves nothing to be desired. But let us also emphasise, that it was by\nno mere method of the intellect or observation of history that Amos was\nled to assert the unity of the Divine Providence. The inspiration in\nthis was a moral one: Jehovah was ruler and guide of all the families\nof mankind, because He was exalted in righteousness; and the field in\nwhich that righteousness was proved and made manifest was the life and\nthe fate of Israel. Therefore to this Amos now turns. _Lo, the eyes of\nthe Lord Jehovah are on the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from\nthe face of the ground._ In other words, Jehovah's sovereignty over the\nworld was not proved by Israel's conquest of the latter, but by His\nunflinching application of the principles of righteousness, at whatever\ncost, to Israel herself.\n\nUp to this point, then, the voice of Amos is unmistakable, uttering\nthe doctrine, so original to him, that in the judgment of God Israel\nshall not be specially favoured, and the sentence, we have heard\nso often from him, of her removal from her land. Remember, Amos\nhas not yet said a word in mitigation of the sentence: up to this\npoint of his book it has been presented as inexorable and final. But\nnow to a statement of it as absolute as any that has gone before,\nthere is suddenly added a qualification: _nevertheless I will not\nutterly destroy the house of Jacob--'tis the oracle of Jehovah_.\nAnd then there is added a new picture of exile changed from doom to\ndiscipline, a process of sifting by which only the evil in Israel,\n_all the sinners of My people_, shall perish, but not a grain of\nthe good. _For, lo, I am giving command, and I will toss the house\nof Israel among all the nations, like_ something _that is tossed in\na sieve, but not a pebble_[356] _shall fall to earth. By the sword\nshall die all the sinners of My people, they who say, The calamity\nshall not reach nor anticipate us._[357]\n\nNow as to these qualifications of the hitherto unmitigated judgments\nof the book, it is to be noted that there is nothing in their language\nto lead us to take them from Amos himself. On the contrary, the last\nclause describes what he has always called a characteristic sin of his\nday. Our only difficulties are that hitherto Amos has never qualified\nhis sentences of doom, and that the change now appears so suddenly that\nthe two halves of the verse in which it does so absolutely contradict\neach other. Read them again, ver. 8: _Lo, the eyes of the Lord Jehovah\nare on the sinful nation, and I will destroy it from off the face of\nthe ground--nevertheless destroying I shall not destroy the house of\nJacob: 'tis the oracle of Jehovah._ Can we believe the same prophet to\nhave uttered at the same time these two statements? And is it possible\nto believe that prophet to be the hitherto unwavering, unqualifying\nAmos? Noting these things, let us pass to the rest of the chapter.\nWe break from all shadows; the verses are verses of pure hope. The\njudgment on Israel is not averted; but having taken place her ruin is\nregarded as not irreparable.\n\n_In that day_--the day Amos has threatened of overthrow and ruin--_I\nwill raise again the fallen hut of David and will close up its\nbreaches, and his ruins I will raise, and I will build it up as in the\ndays of old_,[358] _that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all\nthe nations upon whom My Name has been called_--that is, as once their\nPossessor--_'tis the oracle of Jehovah, He who is about to do this_.\n\nThe _fallen hut of David_ undoubtedly means the fall of the kingdom\nof Judah. It is not language Amos uses, or, as it seems to me, could\nhave used, of the fall of the Northern Kingdom only.[359] Again,\nit is undoubted that Amos contemplated the fall of Judah: this is\nimplicit in such a phrase as _the whole family that I brought up\nfrom Egypt_.[360] He saw then _the day_ and _the ruins_ of which\nver. 11 speaks. The only question is, can we attribute to him the\nprediction of a restoration of these ruins? And this is a question\nwhich must be answered in face of the facts that the rest of his book\nis unrelieved by a single gleam of hope, and that his threat of the\nnation's destruction is absolute and final. Now it is significant\nthat in face of those facts Cornill (though he has changed his\nopinion) once believed it was \"surely possible for Amos to include\nrestoration in his prospect of ruin,\" as (he might have added) other\nprophets undoubtedly do. I confess I cannot so readily get over the\nrest of the book and its gloom; and am the less inclined to be sure\nabout these verses being Amos' own that it seems to have been not\nunusual for later generations, for whom the daystar was beginning to\nrise, to add their own inspired hopes to the unrelieved threats of\ntheir predecessors of the midnight. The mention of Edom does not help\nus much: in the days of Amos after the partial conquest by Uzziah\nthe promise of _the rest of Edom_ was singularly appropriate. On the\nother hand, what interest had so purely ethical a prophet in the mere\naddition of territory? To this point we shall have to return for our\nfinal decision. We have still the closing oracle--a very pleasant\npiece of music, as if the birds had come out after the thunderstorm,\nand the wet hills were glistening in the sunshine.\n\n_Lo, days are coming--'tis the oracle of Jehovah--when the ploughman\nshall catch up the reaper, and the grape-treader him that streweth the\nseed._ The seasons shall jostle each other, harvest following hard\nupon seed-time, vintage upon spring. It is that \"happy contention\nof seasons\" which Josephus describes as the perpetual blessing of\nGalilee.[361] _And the mountains shall drip with new wine, and all the\nhills shall flow down. And I will bring back the captivity of My people\nIsrael, and they shall build the waste cities and dwell_ in them, _and\nplant vineyards and drink the wine thereof, and make gardens and eat\ntheir fruits. And I will plant them on their own ground; and they shall\nnot be uprooted any more from their own ground which I have given to\nthem, saith Jehovah thy God._[362] Again we meet the difficulty: does\nthe voice that speaks here speak with captivity already realised? or is\nit the voice of one who projects himself forward to a day, which, by\nthe oath of the Lord Himself, is certain to come?\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe have now surveyed the whole of this much-doubted, much-defended\npassage. I have stated fully the arguments on both sides. On the one\nhand, we have the fact that nothing in the language of the verses,\nand nothing in their historical allusions, precludes their being by\nAmos; we have also to admit that, having threatened a day of ruin,\nit was possible for Amos to realise by his mind's eye its arrival,\nand standing at that point to see the sunshine flooding the ruins and\nto prophesy a restoration. In all this there is nothing impossible\nin itself or inconsistent with the rest of the book. On the other\nhand, we have the impressive and incommensurable facts: _first_, that\nthis change to hope comes suddenly, without preparation and without\nstatement of reasons, at the very end of a book whose characteristics\nare not only a final and absolute sentence of ruin upon the people,\nand an outlook of unrelieved darkness, but scornful discouragement of\nevery popular vision of a prosperous future; and, _second_, that the\nprophetic books contain numerous signs that later generations wove\ntheir own brighter hopes into the abrupt and hopeless conclusions of\nprophecies of judgment.\n\nTo this balance of evidence is there anything to add? I think there\nis; and that it decides the question. All these prospects of the\nfuture restoration of Israel are absolutely without a moral feature.\nThey speak of return from captivity, of political restoration, of\nsupremacy over the Gentiles, and of a revived Nature, hanging with\nfruit, dripping with must. Such hopes are natural and legitimate to\na people who were long separated from their devastated and neglected\nland, and whose punishment and penitence were accomplished. But they\nare not natural to a prophet like Amos. Imagine him predicting a future\nlike this! Imagine him describing the consummation of his people's\nhistory, without mentioning one of those moral triumphs to rally his\npeople to which his whole passion and energy had been devoted. To me\nit is impossible to hear the voice that cried, _Let justice roll on\nlike waters and righteousness like a perennial stream_, in a peroration\nwhich is content to tell of mountains dripping with must and of a\npeople satisfied with vineyards and gardens. These are legitimate\nhopes; but they are the hopes of a generation of other conditions and\nof other deserts than the generation of Amos.\n\nIf then the gloom of this great book is turned into light, such a\nchange is not due to Amos.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[344] See Chapter VI., Section 3.\n\n[345] The phrase is uncertain.\n\n[346] Wellhausen thinks that the prophet could not have put the\nparenthesis in the mouth of the traders, and therefore regards it as\nan intrusion or gloss. But this is hypercriticism. The last clause,\nhowever, may be a mere clerical repetition of ii. 6.\n\n[347] Isa. lviii. See the exposition of the passage in the writer's\n_Isaiah_ xl.-lxvi. (Expositor's Bible Series), pp. 417 ff.: \"Our\nprophet, while exalting the practical service of man at the expense\nof certain religious forms, equally exalts the observance of the\nSabbath; ... he places the keeping of the Sabbath on a level with the\npractice of love.\"\n\n[348] _She shall rise_, etc.--The clause is almost the same as in ix.\n5_b_, and the text differs from the LXX., which omits _and heave_. Is\nit an insertion?\n\n[349] Literally _in the day of light_.\n\n[350] That is, Samaria is used in the wider sense of the kingdom, not\nthe capital, and there is no need for Wellhausen's substitution of\nBethel for it.\n\n[351] This in answer to Gunning (_De Godspraken van Amos_, 1885),\nWellh. _in loco_, and K\u00f6nig (_Einleitung_, p. 304, _d_), who reckon\nvv. 11 and 12 to be the insertion: the latter on the additional\nground that the formula of ver. 13, _in that day_, points back to\nver. 9; but not to the _Lo, days are coming_ of ver. 11. But thus\nto miss out vv. 11 and 12 leaves us with greater difficulties than\nbefore. For without them how are we to explain the _thirst_ of ver.\n13. It is left unintroduced; there is no hint of a drought in 9\nand 10. It seems to me then that, since we must omit some verse,\nit ought to be ver. 13; and this the rather that if omitted it is\nnot missed. It is just the kind of general statement that would be\nadded by an unthinking scribe; and it does not readily connect with\nver. 14, while ver. 12 does do so. For why should youths and maids\nbe specially singled out as swearing by Samaria, Dan and Beersheba?\nThese were the oaths of the whole people, to whom vv. 11 and 12\nrefer. I see a very clear case, therefore, for omitting ver. 13.\n\n[352] LXX. here gives a mere repetition of the preceding oath.\n\n[353] Doughty: _Arabia Deserta_ I. 269.\n\n[354] Since it is the capital that has been struck, and the command\nis given to break _the thresholds on the head of all of them_, many\ntranslate _lintels_ or _architraves_ instead of _thresholds_ (_e.g._\nHitzig, and Guthe in Kautzsch's _Bibel_). But the word \u05e1\u05b4\u05e4\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd always\nmeans thresholds and the blow here is fundamental.\n\n[355] LXX. adds _of Hosts_: on the whole passage see next chapter.\n\n[356] We should have expected _a grain_, but the word \u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b9\u05d5\u05e8 only\nmeans small stone: cf. 2 Sam. xvii. 13. The LXX. has here \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1,\nfracture, ruin. Cf. _Z.A.T.W._, III. 125.\n\n[357] The text has been disturbed here; the verbs are in forms not\npossible to the sense. For \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05d2\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05e9\u05c1 read either \u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05e9\u05c2\u05d9\u05d2 with Hitzig\nor \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1 with Wellhausen. \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05e7\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd, Hiph., is not impossible in\nan intransitive sense, but probably Wellhausen is right in reading\nPi, \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e7\u05b7\u05d3\u05b5\u05bc\u05dd. The reading \u05e2\u05d3\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 which the Greek suggests and\nHoffmann and Wellhausen adopt is not so appropriate to the preceding\nverb as \u05d1\u05e2\u05d3\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 of the text.\n\n[358] The text reads _their breaches_, and some accordingly point\n\u05e1\u05bb\u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea _hut_, as if it were the plural _huts_ (Hoffmann, _Z.A.T.W._,\n1883, 125; Schwally, _id._, 1890, 226, n. 1; Guthe in Kautzsch's\n_Bibel_). The LXX. has the sing., and it is easy to see how the\nplur. fem. suffix may have risen from confusion with the following\nconjunction.\n\n[359] This against Cornill, _Einleitung_, 176.\n\n[360] iii. 1.\n\n[361] III. _Wars_, x. 8. With the above verses of the Book of Amos Lev.\nxxvi. 5 has been compared: \"your threshing shall reach to the vintage\nand the vintage to the sowing time.\" But there is no reason to suppose\nthat either of two so natural passages depends on the other.\n\n[362] LXX. _God of Hosts_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XI\n\n _COMMON-SENSE AND THE REIGN OF LAW_\n\n AMOS iii. 3-8; iv. 6-13; v. 8, 9; vi. 12; viii. 8; ix. 5, 6.\n\n\nFools, when they face facts, which is seldom, face them one by one,\nand, as a consequence, either in ignorant contempt or in panic. With\nthis inordinate folly Amos charged the religion of his day. The\nsuperstitious people, careful of every point of ritual and very greedy\nof omens, would not ponder real facts nor set cause to effect. Amos\nrecalled them to common life. _Does a bird fall upon a snare, except\nthere be a loop on her? Does the trap itself rise front the ground,\nexcept it be catching something_--something alive in it that struggles,\nand so lifts the trap? _Shall the alarum be blown in a city, and the\npeople not tremble?_ Daily life is impossible without putting two and\ntwo together. But this is just what Israel will not do with the sacred\nevents of their time. To religion they will not add common-sense.\n\nFor Amos himself, all things which happen are in sequence and in\nsympathy. He has seen this in the simple life of the desert; he is\nsure of it throughout the tangle and hubbub of history. One thing\nexplains another; one makes another inevitable. When he has illustrated\nthe truth in common life, Amos claims it for especially four of the\ngreat facts of the time. The sins of society, of which society is\ncareless; the physical calamities, which they survive and forget; the\napproach of Assyria, which they ignore; the word of the prophet, which\nthey silence,--all these belong to each other. Drought, Pestilence,\nEarthquake, Invasion conspire--and the Prophet holds their secret.\n\nNow it is true that for the most part Amos describes this sequence\nof events as the personal action of Jehovah. _Shall evil befall, and\nJehovah not have done it?... I have smitten you.... I will raise up\nagainst you a Nation.... Prepare to meet thy God, O Israel!_[363] Yet\neven where the personal impulse of the Deity is thus emphasised, we\nfeel equal stress laid upon the order and the inevitable certainty\nof the process. Amos nowhere uses Isaiah's great phrase: _a God of\nMishpat_, a _God of Order_ or _Law_. But he means almost the same\nthing: God works by methods which irresistibly fulfil themselves. Nay\nmore. Sometimes this sequence sweeps upon the prophet's mind with\nsuch force as to overwhelm all his sense of the Personal within it.\nThe Will and the Word of the God who causes the thing are crushed out\nby the \"Must Be\" of the thing itself. Take even the descriptions of\nthose historical crises, which the prophet most explicitly proclaims\nas the visitations of the Almighty. In some of the verses all thought\nof God Himself is lost in the roar and foam with which that tide of\nnecessity bursts up through them. The fountains of the great deep\nbreak loose, and while the universe trembles to the shock, it seems\nthat even the voice of the Deity is overwhelmed. In one passage,\nimmediately after describing Israel's ruin as due to Jehovah's word,\nAmos asks how could it have happened otherwise:--\n\n_Shall horses run up a cliff, or oxen plough the sea? that ye\nturn justice into poison, and the fruit of righteousness into\nwormwood._[364] A moral order exists, which it is as impossible to\nbreak without disaster as it would be to break the natural order by\ndriving horses upon a precipice. There is an inherent necessity in\nthe sinners' doom. Again, he says of Israel's sin: _Shall not the\nLand tremble for this? Yea, it shall rise up together like the Nile,\nand heave and sink like the Nile of Egypt._[365] The crimes of Israel\nare so intolerable, that in its own might the natural frame of things\nrevolts against them. In these great crises, therefore, as in the\nsimple instances adduced from everyday life, Amos had a sense of what\nwe call law, distinct from, and for moments even overwhelming, that\nsense of the personal purpose of God, admission to the secrets of\nwhich had marked his call to be a prophet.[366]\n\nThese instincts we must not exaggerate into a system. There is no\nphilosophy in Amos, nor need we wish there were. Far more instructive\nis what we do find--a virgin sense of the sympathy of all things, the\nthrill rather than the theory of a universe. And this faith, which is\nnot a philosophy, is especially instructive on these two points: that\nit springs from the moral sense; and that it embraces, not history\nonly, but nature.\n\nIt springs from the moral sense. Other races have arrived at a\nconception of the universe along other lines: some by the observation\nof physical laws valid to the recesses of space; some by logic and the\nunity of Reason. But Israel found the universe through the conscience.\nIt is a historical fact that the Unity of God, the Unity of History\nand the Unity of the World, did, in this order, break upon Israel,\nthrough conviction and experience of the universal sovereignty of\nrighteousness. We see the beginnings of the process in Amos. To him the\nsequences which work themselves out through history and across nature\nare moral. Righteousness is the hinge on which the world hangs; loosen\nit, and history and nature feel the shock. History punishes the sinful\nnation. But nature, too, groans beneath the guilt of man; and in the\nDrought, the Pestilence and the Earthquake provides his scourges. It is\na belief which has stamped itself upon the language of mankind. What\nelse is \"plague\" than \"blow\" or \"scourge\"?\n\nThis brings us to the second point--our prophet's treatment of Nature.\n\nApart from the disputed passages (which we shall take afterwards\nby themselves) we have in the Book of Amos few glimpses of nature,\nand these always under a moral light. There is not in any chapter\na landscape visible in its own beauty. Like all desert-dwellers,\nwho when they would praise the works of God lift their eyes to the\nheavens, Amos gives us but the outlines of the earth--a mountain\nrange,[367] or the crest of a forest,[368] or the bare back of the\nland, bent from sea to sea.[369] Nearly all his figures are drawn\nfrom the desert--the torrent, the wild beasts, the wormwood.[370]\nIf he visits the meadows of the shepherds, it is with the terror of\nthe people's doom;[371] if the vineyards or orchards, it is with\nthe mildew and the locust;[372] if the towns, it is with drought,\neclipse and earthquake.[373] To him, unlike his fellows, unlike\nespecially Hosea, the whole land is one theatre of judgment; but it\nis a theatre trembling to its foundations with the drama enacted upon\nit. Nay, land and nature are themselves actors in the drama. Physical\nforces are inspired with moral purpose, and become the ministers of\nrighteousness. This is the converse of Elijah's vision. To the older\nprophet the message came that God was not in the fire nor in the\nearthquake nor in the tempest, but only in the still small voice. But\nto Amos the fire, the earthquake and the tempest are all in alliance\nwith the Voice, and execute the doom which it utters. The difference\nwill be appreciated by us, if we remember the respective problems set\nto prophecy in those two periods. To Elijah, prophet of the elements,\nwild worker by fire and water, by life and death, the spiritual had\nto be asserted and enforced by itself. Ecstatic as he was, Elijah\nhad to learn that the Word is more Divine than all physical violence\nand terror. But Amos understood that for his age the question was\nvery different. Not only was the God of Israel dissociated from the\npowers of nature, which were assigned by the popular mind to the\nvarious Ba'alim of the land, so that there was a divorce between His\ngovernment of the people and the influences that fed the people's\nlife; but morality itself was conceived as provincial. It was\nnarrowed to the national interests; it was summed up in mere rules\nof police, and these were looked upon as not so important as the\nobservances of the ritual. Therefore Amos was driven to show that\nnature and morality are one. Morality is not a set of conventions.\n\"Morality is the order of things.\" Righteousness is on the scale of\nthe universe. All things tremble to the shock of sin; all things work\ntogether for good to them that fear God.\n\nWith this sense of law, of moral necessity, in Amos we must not fail\nto connect that absence of all appeal to miracle, which is also\nconspicuous in his book.\n\nWe come now to the three disputed passages:--\n\niv. 13:--_For, lo! He Who formed the hills,_[374] _and createth\nthe wind,_[375] _and declareth to man what His_[376] _mind is; Who\nmaketh the dawn into darkness, and marcheth on the heights of the\nland--Jehovah, God of Hosts, is His Name._\n\nv. 8, 9:--_Maker of the Pleiades and Orion,_[377] _turning to morning\nthe murk, and day into night He darkeneth; Who calleth for the waters\nof the sea, and poureth them forth on the face of the earth--Jehovah\nHis Name; Who flasheth ruin on the strong, and destruction cometh\ndown on the fortress._[378]\n\nix. 5, 6:--_And the Lord Jehovah of the Hosts, Who toucheth the\nearth and it rocketh, and all mourn that dwell on it, and it riseth\nlike the Nile together, and sinketh like the Nile of Egypt; Who hath\nbuilded in the heavens His ascents, and founded His vault upon the\nearth; Who calleth to the waters of the sea, and poureth them on the\nface of the earth--Jehovah_[379] _His Name._\n\nThese sublime passages it is natural to take as the triple climax\nof the doctrine we have traced through the Book of Amos. Are they\nnot the natural leap of the soul to the stars? The same shepherd's\neye which has marked sequence and effect unfailing on the desert\nsoil, does it not now sweep the clear heavens above the desert, and\nfind there also all things ordered and arrayed? The same mind which\ntraced the Divine processes down history, which foresaw the hosts of\nAssyria marshalled for Israel's punishment, which felt the overthrow\nof justice shock the nation to their ruin, and read the disasters of\nthe husbandman's year as the vindication of a law higher than the\nphysical--does it not now naturally rise beyond such instances of the\nDivine order, round which the dust of history rolls, to the lofty,\nundimmed outlines of the Universe as a whole, and, in consummation of\nits message, declare that \"all is Law,\" and Law intelligible to man?\n\nBut in the way of so attractive a conclusion the literary criticism\nof the book has interposed. It is maintained[380] that, while none\nof these sublime verses are indispensable to the argument of Amos,\nsome of them actually interrupt it, so that when they are removed it\nbecomes consistent; that such ejaculations in praise of Jehovah's\ncreative power are not elsewhere met with in Hebrew prophecy before\nthe time of the Exile; that they sound very like echoes of the Book\nof Job; and that in the Septuagint version of Hosea we actually find\na similar doxology, wedged into the middle of an authentic verse of\nthe prophet.[381] To these arguments against the genuineness of the\nthree famous passages, other critics, not less able and not less\nfree, like Robertson Smith and Kuenen,[382] have replied that such\nejaculations at critical points of the prophet's discourse \"are\nnot surprising under the general conditions of prophetic oratory\";\nand that, while one of the doxologies does appear to break the\nargument[383] of the context, they are all of them thoroughly in the\nspirit and the style of Amos. To this point the discussion has been\ncarried; it seems to need a closer examination. .. We may at once\ndismiss the argument which has been drawn from that obvious intrusion\ninto the Greek of Hosea xiii. 4. Not only is this verse not so suited\nto the doctrine of Hosea as the doxologies are to the doctrine of\nAmos; but while they are definite and sublime, it is formal and\nflat--\"Who made firm the heavens and founded the earth, Whose hands\nfounded all the host of heaven, and He did not display them that thou\nshouldest walk after them.\" The passages in Amos are vision; this is\na piece of catechism crumbling into homily.\n\nAgain--an argument in favour of the authenticity of these passages\nmay be drawn from the character of their subjects. We have seen the\npart which the desert played in shaping the temper and the style of\nAmos. But the works of the Creator, to which these passages lift\ntheir praise, are just those most fondly dwelt upon by all the poetry\nof the desert. The Arabian nomad, when he magnifies the power of\nGod, finds his subjects not on the bare earth about him, but in the\nbrilliant heavens and the heavenly processes.\n\nAgain, the critic who affirms that the passages in Amos \"in every\ncase sensibly disturb the connection,\"[384] exaggerates. In the\ncase of the first of them, chap. iv. 13, the disturbance is not at\nall \"sensible\"; though it must be admitted that the oracle closes\nimpressively enough without it. The last of them, chap. ix. 5,\n6--which repeats a clause already found in the book[385]--is as much\nin sympathy with its context as most of the oracles in the somewhat\nscattered discourse of that last section of the book. The real\ndifficulty is the second doxology, chap. v. 8, 9, which does break\nthe connection, and in a sudden and violent way. Remove it, and the\nargument is consistent. We cannot read chap. v. without feeling that,\nwhether Amos wrote these verses or not, they did not originally stand\nwhere they stand at present.\n\nNow, taken with this dispensableness of two of the passages and this\nobvious intrusion of one of them, the following additional fact\nbecomes ominous. _Jehovah is His Name_ (which occurs in two of the\npassages),[386] or _Jehovah of Hosts is His Name_ (which occurs at\nleast in one),[387] is a construction which does not happen elsewhere\nin the book, except in a verse where it is awkward and where we\nhave already seen reason to doubt its genuineness.[388] But still\nmore, the phrase does not occur in any other prophet, till we come\ndown to the oracles which compose Isaiah xl.-lxvi. Here it happens\nthrice--twice in passages dating from the Exile,[389] and once in a\npassage suspected by some to be of still later date.[390] In the\nBook of Jeremiah the phrase is found eight times; but either in\npassages already on other grounds judged by many critics to be later\nthan Jeremiah,[391] or where by itself it is probably an intrusion\ninto the text.[392] Now is it a mere coincidence that a phrase,\nwhich, outside the Book of Amos, occurs only in writing of the time\nof the Exile and in passages considered for other reasons to be\npost-exilic insertions--is it a mere coincidence that within the Book\nof Amos it should again be found only in suspected verses?\n\nThere appears to be in this more than a coincidence; and the present\nwriter cannot but feel a very strong case against the traditional\nbelief that these doxologies are original and integral portions\nof the Book of Amos. At the same time a case which has failed to\nconvince critics like Robertson Smith and Kuenen cannot be considered\nconclusive, and we are so ignorant of many of the conditions of\nprophetic oratory at this period that dogmatism is impossible. For\ninstance, the use by Amos of the Divine titles is a matter over\nwhich uncertainty still lingers; and any further argument on the\nsubject must include a fuller discussion than space here allows of\nthe remarkable distribution of those titles throughout the various\nsections of the book.[393]\n\nBut if it be not given to us to prove this kind of authenticity--a\nquestion whose data are so obscure, yet whose answer fortunately is of\nso little significance--let us gladly welcome that greater Authenticity\nwhose undeniable proofs these verses so splendidly exhibit. No one\nquestions their right to the place which some great spirit gave them\nin this book--their suitableness to its grand and ordered theme, their\npure vision and their eternal truth. That common-sense, and that\nconscience, which, moving among the events of earth and all the tangled\nprocesses of history, find everywhere reason and righteousness at work,\nin these verses claim the Universe for the same powers, and see in\nstars and clouds and the procession of day and night the One Eternal\nGod Who _declareth to man what His mind is_.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[363] iii. 6_b_; iv. 9; vi. 14; iv. 12_b_.\n\n[364] vi. 12.\n\n[365] viii. 8.\n\n[366] iii. 7: _Jehovah God doeth nothing, but He hath revealed His\nsecret to His servants the prophets._\n\n[367] i. 2; iii. 9; ix. 3.\n\n[368] ii. 9.\n\n[369] viii. 12.\n\n[370] v. 24; 19, 20, etc.; 7; vi. 12.\n\n[371] i. 2.\n\n[372] iv. 9 ff.\n\n[373] iv. 6-11; vi. 11; viii. 8 ff.\n\n[374] LXX. _the thunder_.\n\n[375] Or _spirit_.\n\n[376] _I.e. God's_; a more natural rendering than to take _his_ (as\nHitzig does) as meaning _man's_.\n\n[377] See above, pp. 166 f. _n._\n\n[378] Text of last clause uncertain; see above, p. 167.\n\n[379] LXX. _Jehovah of Hosts_.\n\n[380] First in 1875 by Duhm, _Theol. der Proph._, p. 119; and after\nhim by Oort, _Theol. Tjidschrift_, 1880, pp. 116 f.; Wellhausen, _in\nlocis_; Stade, _Gesch._, I. 571; Cornill, _Einleitung_, 176.\n\n[381] Hosea xiii. 4\n\n[382] Smith, _Prophets of Israel_, p. 399; Kuenen, _Hist. Krit.\nEinl._ (Germ. Ed.), II. 347.\n\n[383] v. 8, 9.\n\n[384] Cornill, _Einl._, 176.\n\n[385] Cf. viii. 8.\n\n[386] v. 8; ix. 6, though here LXX. read _Jehovah of Hosts is His Name_.\n\n[387] iv. 13. See previous note.\n\n[388] v. 27. See above, pp. 172 f. _n._: cf. Hosea xii. 6.\n\n[389] xlvii. 4 and liv. 5.\n\n[390] xlviii. 2: cf. Duhm, _in loco_, and Cheyne, _Introduction to\nthe Book of Isaiah_, 301.\n\n[391] x. 16; xxxi. 35; xxxii. 18; l. 34 (perhaps a quotation from\nIsa. xlvii. 4); li. 19, 57.\n\n[392] xlvi. 18, where the words \u05e9\u05de\u05d5 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea fail in LXX.; xlviii. 15\n_b_, where the clause in which it occurs is wanting in the LXX.\n\n[393] But I have room at least for a bare statement of these\nremarkable facts:--\n\nThe titles for the God of Israel used in the Book of Amos are these:\n(1) _Thy God, O Israel_, \u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05da; (2) _Jehovah_, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4; (3) _Lord\nJehovah_, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9; (4) _Lord Jehovah of the Hosts_, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea;\n(5) _Jehovah God of Hosts_ or _of the Hosts_, \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 or \u05d4\u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea.\n\nNow in the First Section, chaps. i., ii., it is interesting that we\nfind none of the variations which are compounded with _Hosts_, \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea.\nBy itself \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 (especially in the phrase _Thus saith Jehovah_, \u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05db\u05d4\n\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4) is general; and once only (i. 8) is _Lord Jehovah_ employed.\nThe phrase, _oracle of Jehovah_, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e0\u05b0\u05d0\u05bb\u05dd, is also rare; it occurs\nonly twice (ii. 11, 16), and then only in the passage dealing with\nIsrael, and not at all in the oracles against foreign nations.\n\nIn Sections II. and III. the simple \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 is again most frequently used.\nBut we find also _Lord Jehovah_, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9 (iii. 7, 8; iv. 2, 5; v.\n3, with \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 alone in the parallel ver. 4; vi. 8; vii. 1, 2, 4 _bis_,\n5, 6; viii. 1, 3, 9, 11), used either indifferently with \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4; or in\nverses where it seems more natural to emphasise the sovereignty of\nJehovah than His simple Name (as, _e.g._, where _He swears_, iv. 2, vi.\n8, yet when the same phrase occurs in viii. 7 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 alone is used); or\nin the solemn Visions of the Third Section (but not in the Narrative);\nand sometimes we find in the Visions _Lord_, \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9, alone without \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4\n(vii. 7, 8; ix. 1). The titles containing \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea or \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 occur\n_nine_ times. Of these _five_ are in passages which we have seen other\nreasons to suppose are insertions: two of the Doxologies--iv. 13, \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea\n\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 and ix. 5, \u05d4\u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9 (in addition the LXX. read in\nix. 6 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4), and in v. 14, 15 (see p. 168) and 27 (see p. 172),\nin all three \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. The _four_ genuine passages are iii. 13,\nwhere we find \u05d4\u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 preceded by \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9; v. 16, where we have\n\u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 followed by \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9; vi. 8, \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4 \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea, and vi. 14,\n\u05e6\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. Throughout the last two sections of the book \u05e0\u05b0\u05d0\u05bb\u05dd is\nused with all these forms of the Divine title.\n\n\n\n\n _HOSEA_\n\n\n\n\n \"For leal love have I desired and not sacrifice\n And the knowledge of God rather than burnt-offerings.\"\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XII\n\n _THE BOOK OF HOSEA_\n\n\nThe Book of Hosea consists of two unequal sections, chaps. i.-iii.\nand chaps. iv.-xiv., which differ in the dates of their standpoints,\nto a large extent also in the details of their common subjects,\nbut still more largely in their form and style. The First Section\nis in the main narrative; though the style rises to the pitch of\npassionate pleading and promise, it is fluent and equable. If one\nverse be omitted and three others transposed,[394] the argument\nis continuous. In the Second Section, on the contrary, we have a\nstream of addresses and reflections, appeals, upbraidings, sarcasms,\nrecollections of earlier history, denunciations and promises, which,\nwith little logical connection and almost no pauses or periods, start\nimpulsively from each other, and for a large part are expressed in\nelliptic and ejaculatory phrases. In the present restlessness of\nBiblical Criticism it would have been surprising if this difference\nof style had not prompted some minds to a difference of authorship.\nGr\u00e4tz[395] has distinguished two Hoseas, separated by a period of\nfifty years. But if, as we shall see, the First Section reflects\nthe end of the reign of Jeroboam II., who died about 743, then the\nnext few years, with their revolutionary changes in Israel, are\nsufficient to account for the altered outlook of the Second Section;\nwhile the altered style is fully explained by difference of occasion\nand motive. In both sections not only are the religious principles\nidentical, and many of the characteristic expressions,[396] but there\nbreathes throughout the same urgent and jealous temper, which renders\nHosea's personality so distinctive among the prophets. Within this\nunity, of course, we must not be surprised to find, as in the Book of\nAmos, verses which cannot well be authentic.\n\n\n FIRST SECTION: HOSEA'S PROPHETIC LIFE.\n\nWith the removal of some of the verses the argument becomes clear and\nconsecutive. After the story of the wife and children (i. 2-9), who\nare symbols of the land and people of Israel in their apostasy from\nGod (2, 4, 6, 9), the Divine voice calls on the living generation to\nplead with their mother lest destruction come (ii. 2-5, Eng.; ii. 4-7,\nHeb.[397]), but then passes definite sentence of desolation on the land\nand of exile on the people (6-13, Eng.; 8-15, Heb.), which however\nis not final doom, but discipline,[398] with the ultimate promise of\nthe return of the nation's youth, their renewed betrothal to Jehovah\nand the restoration of nature (14-23). Then follows the story of the\nprophet's restoration of his wife, also with discipline (chap. iii.).\n\nNotice that, although the story of the wife's fall has preceded the\ndeclaration of Israel's apostasy, it is Israel's restoration which\nprecedes the wife's. The ethical significance of this order we shall\nillustrate in the next chapter.\n\nIn this section the disturbing verses are i. 7 and the group of\nthree--i. 10, 11, ii. 1 (Eng.; but ii. 1-3 Heb.). Chap. i. 7\nintroduces Judah as excepted from the curse passed upon Israel; it is\nso obviously intrusive in a prophecy dealing only with Israel, and\nit so clearly reflects the deliverance of Judah from Sennacherib in\n701, that we cannot hold it for anything but an insertion of a date\nsubsequent to that deliverance, and introduced by a pious Jew to\nsignalise Judah's fate in contrast with Israel's.[399]\n\nThe other three verses (i. 10, 11, ii. 1, Eng.; ii. 1-3, Heb.)\nintroduce a promise of restoration before the sentence of judgment is\ndetailed, or any ethical conditions of restoration are stated. That is,\nthey break and tangle an argument otherwise consistent and progressive\nfrom beginning to end of the Section. Every careful reader must feel\nthem out of place where they lie. Their awkwardness has been so much\nappreciated that, while in the Hebrew text they have been separated\nfrom chap. i., in the Greek they have been separated from chap. ii.\nThat is to say, some have felt they have no connection with what\nprecedes them, others none with what follows them; while our English\nversion, by distributing them between the two chapters, only makes\nmore sensible their superfluity. If they really belong to the prophecy,\ntheir proper place is after the last verse of chap. ii.[400] This is\nactually the order in which part of it and part of them are quoted\nby St. Paul.[401] At the same time, when so arranged, they repeat\nsomewhat awkwardly the language of ii. 23, and scarcely form a climax\nto the chapter. There is nothing in their language to lead us to doubt\nthat they are Hosea's own; and ver. 11 shows that they must have been\nwritten at least before the captivity of Northern Israel.[402]\n\nThe only other suspected clause in this section is that in iii. 5,\n_and David their king_;[403] but if it be struck out the verse is\nrendered awkward, if not impossible, by the immediate repetition of\nthe Divine name, which would not have been required in the absence of\nthe suspected clause.[404]\n\nThe text of the rest of the section is remarkably free from\nobscurities. The Greek version offers few variants, and most of these\nare due to mistranslation.[405] In iii. 1 for _loved of a husband_ it\nreads _loving evil_.\n\nEvidently this section was written before the death of Jeroboam II.\nThe house of Jehu still reigns; and as Hosea predicts its fall by war\non the classic battleground of Jezreel, the prophecy must have been\nwritten before the actual fall, which took the form of an internal\nrevolt against Zechariah, the son of Jeroboam. With this agrees the\ntone of the section. There are the same evils in Israel which Amos\nexposed in the prosperous years of the same reign; but Hosea appears to\nrealise the threatened exile from a nearer standpoint. It is probable\nalso that part of the reason of his ability to see his way through the\ncaptivity to the people's restoration is due to a longer familiarity\nwith the approach of captivity than Amos experienced before he wrote.\nBut, of course, for Hosea's promise of restoration there were, as we\nshall see, other and greater reasons of a religious kind.[406]\n\n\n SECOND SECTION: CHAPS. iv.-xiv.\n\nWhen we pass into these chapters we feel that the times are changed.\nThe dynasty of Jehu has passed: kings are falling rapidly: Israel\ndevours its rulers:[407] there is no loyalty to the king; he is\nsuddenly cut off;[408] all the princes are revolters.[409] Round so\ndespised and so unstable a throne the nation tosses in disorder.\nConspiracies are rife. It is not only, as in Amos, the the sins of\nthe luxurious, of them that are at ease in Zion, which are exposed;\nbut also literal bloodshed: highway robbery with murder, abetted by\nthe priests;[410] the thief breaketh in and the robber-troop maketh a\nraid.[411] Amos looked out on foreign nations across a quiet Israel;\nhis views of the world are wide and clear; but in the Book of Hosea\nthe dust is up, and into what is happening beyond the frontier we\nget only glimpses. There is enough, however, to make visible another\ngreat change since the days of Jeroboam. Israel's self-reliance is\ngone. She is as fluttered as a startled bird: _They call unto Egypt,\nthey go unto Assyria._[412] Their wealth is carried as a gift to King\nJareb,[413] and they evidently engage in intrigues with Egypt. But\neverything is hopeless: kings cannot save, for Ephraim is seized by\nthe pangs of a fatal crisis.[414]\n\nThis broken description reflects--and all the more faithfully because\nof its brokenness--the ten years which followed on the death of\nJeroboam II. about 743.[415] His son Zechariah, who succeeded him,\nwas in six months assassinated by Shallum ben Jabesh, who within a\nmonth more was himself cut down by Menahem ben Gadi.[416] Menahem\nheld the throne for six or seven years, but only by sending to\nthe King of Assyria an enormous tribute which he exacted from the\nwealthy magnates of Israel.[417] Discontent must have followed these\nmeasures, such discontent with their rulers as Hosea describes.\nPekahiah ben Menahem kept the throne for little over a year after his\nfather's death, and was assassinated by his captain,[418] Pekah ben\nRemaliah, with fifty Gileadites, and Pekah took the throne about 736.\nThis second and bloody usurpation may be one of those on which Hosea\ndwells; but if so it is the last historical allusion in his book.\nThere is no reference to the war of Pekah and Rezin against Ahaz\nof Judah which Isaiah describes,[419] and to which Hosea must have\nalluded had he been still prophesying.[420] There is no allusion to\nits consequence in Tiglath-Pileser's conquest of Gilead and Galilee\nin 734-733. On the contrary, these provinces are still regarded as\npart of the body politic of Israel.[421] Nor is there any sign that\nIsrael have broken with Assyria; to the last the book represents them\nas fawning on the Northern Power.[422]\n\nIn all probability, then, the Book of Hosea was closed before 734\nB.C. The Second Section dates from the years behind that and back to\nthe death of Jeroboam II. about 743, while the First Section, as we\nsaw, reflects the period immediately before the latter.\n\nWe come now to the general style of chaps. iv.-xiv. The period,\nas we have seen, was one of the most broken of all the history\nof Israel; the political outlook, the temper of the people, were\nconstantly changing. Hosea, who watched these kaleidoscopes, had\nhimself an extraordinarily mobile and vibrant mind. There could be\nno greater contrast to that fixture of conscience which renders the\nBook of Amos so simple in argument, so firm in style.[423] It was a\nleaden plummet which Amos saw Jehovah setting to the structure of\nIsrael's life.[424] But Hosea felt his own heart hanging at the end\nof the line; and this was a heart that could never be still. Amos is\nthe prophet of law; he sees the Divine processes work themselves\nout, irrespective of the moods and intrigues of the people, with\nwhich, after all, he was little familiar. So each of his paragraphs\nmoves steadily forward to a climax, and every climax is Doom--the\ncaptivity of the people to Assyria. You can divide his book by these\nthings; it has its periods, strophes and refrains. It marches like\nthe hosts of the Lord of hosts. But Hosea had no such unhampered\nvision of great laws. He was too familiar with the rapid changes of\nhis fickle people; and his affection for them was too anxious. His\nstyle has all the restlessness and irritableness of hunger about\nit--the hunger of love. Hosea's eyes are never at rest. He seeks, he\nwelcomes, for moments of extraordinary fondness he dwells upon every\nsign of his people's repentance. But a Divine jealousy succeeds, and\nhe questions the motives of the change. You feel that his love has\nbeen overtaken and surprised by his knowledge; and in fact his whole\nstyle might be described as a race between the two--a race varying\nand uncertain up to almost the end. The transitions are very swift.\nYou come upon a passage of exquisite tenderness: the prophet puts\nthe people's penitence in his own words with a sympathy and poetry\nthat are sublime and seem final. But suddenly he remembers how false\nthey are, and there is another light in his eyes. The lustre of their\ntears dies from his verses, like the dews of a midsummer morning in\nEphraim; and all is dry and hard again beneath the brazen sun of\nhis amazement. _What shall I do unto thee, Ephraim? What shall I do\nunto thee, Judah?_ Indeed, this figure of his own is insufficient\nto express the suddenness with which Hosea lights up some intrigue\nof the statesmen of the day, or some evil habit of the priests, or\nsome hidden orgy of the common people. Rather than the sun it is the\nlightning--the lightning in pursuit of a serpent.\n\nThe elusiveness of the style is the greater that many passages do not\nseem to have been prepared for public delivery. They are more the\nplay of the prophet's mind than his set speech. They are not formally\naddressed to an audience, and there is no trace in them of oratorical\nart.\n\nHence the language of this Second Section of the Book of Hosea is\nimpulsive and abrupt beyond all comparison. There is little rhythm\nin it, and almost no argument. Few metaphors are elaborated. Even\nthe brief parallelism of Hebrew poetry seems too long for the quick\nspasms of the writer's heart. \"Osee,\" said Jerome,[425] \"commaticus\nest, et quasi per sententias loquitur.\" He speaks in little clauses,\noften broken off; he is impatient even of copulas. And withal he uses\na vocabulary full of strange words, which the paucity of parallelism\nmakes much the more difficult.\n\nTo this original brokenness and obscurity of the language are due,\n_first_, the great corruption of the text; _second_, the difficulty\nof dividing it; _third_, the uncertainty of deciding its genuineness\nor authenticity.\n\n1. The TEXT of Hosea is one of the most dilapidated in the Old\nTestament, and in parts beyond possibility of repair. It is probable\nthat glosses were found necessary at an earlier period and to a larger\nextent than in most other books: there are evident traces of some; yet\nit is not always possible to disentangle them.[426] The value of the\nGreek version is curiously mixed. The authors had before them much the\nsame difficulties as we have, and they made many more for themselves.\nSome of their mistranslations are outrageous: they occur not only in\nobscure passages, where they may be pardoned;[427] but even where\nthere are parallel terms with which the translators show themselves\nfamiliar.[428] Sometimes they have translated word by word, without\nany attempt to give the general sense; and as a whole their version\nis devoid both of beauty and compactness. Yet not infrequently they\nsupply us with a better reading than the Massoretic text. Occasionally\nthey divide words properly which the latter misdivides.[429] They often\ngive more correctly the easily confused pronominal suffixes;[430]\nand the copula.[431] And they help us to the true readings of many\nother words.[432] Here and there an additional clause in the Greek\nis plethoric, perhaps copied by mistake from a similar verse in the\ncontext.[433] All of these will be noticed separately as we reach them.\nBut, even after these and other aids, we shall find that the text not\ninfrequently remains impracticable.\n\n2. As great as the difficulty of reaching a true text in this Second\nSection of the book is the difficulty of DIVIDING it. Here and there,\nit is true, the Greek helps us to improve upon the division into\nchapters and verses of the Hebrew text, which is that of our own\nEnglish version. Chap. vi. 1-4 ought to follow immediately on to the\nend of chap. v., with the connecting word _saying_. The last few\nwords of chap. vi. go with the first two of chap. vii., but perhaps\nboth are gloss. The openings of chaps. xi. and xii. are better\narranged in the Hebrew than in the Greek. As regards verses we shall\nhave to make several rearrangements.[434] But beyond this more or\nless conventional division into chapters and verses our confidence\nceases. It is impossible to separate the section, long as it is, into\nsubsections, or into oracles, strophes or periods. The reason of this\nwe have already seen, in the turbulence of the period reflected, in\nthe divided interests and abrupt and emotional style of the author,\nand in the probability that part at least of the book was not\nprepared for public speaking. The periods and climaxes, the refrains,\nthe catchwords by which we are helped to divide even the confused\nSecond Section of the Book of Amos, are not found in Hosea. Only\ntwice does the exordium of a spoken address occur: at the beginning\nof the section (chap. iv. 1), and at what is now the opening of the\nnext chapter (v. 1). The phrase _'tis the oracle of Jehovah_, which\noccurs so periodically in Amos, and thrice in the second chapter\nof Hosea, is found only once in chaps. iv.-xiv. Again, the obvious\nclimaxes or perorations, of which we found so many in Amos, are very\nfew,[435] and even when they occur the next verses start impulsively\nfrom them, without a pause.\n\nIn spite of these difficulties, since the section is so long, attempts\nat division have been made. Ewald distinguished three parts in three\ndifferent tempers: _First_, iv.-vi. 11 _a_, God's Plaint against His\npeople; _Second_, vi. 11 _b_-ix. 9, Their Punishment; _Third_, ix.\n10-xiv. 10, Retrospect of the earlier history--warning and consolation.\nDriver also divides into three subsections, but differently: _First_,\niv.-viii., in which Israel's Guilt predominates; _Second_, ix.-xi.\n11, in which the prevailing thought is their Punishment; _Third_, xi.\n12-xiv. 10, in which both lines of thought are continued, but followed\nby a glance at the brighter future.[436] What is common to both these\narrangements is the recognition of a certain progress from feelings\nabout Israel's guilt which prevail in the earlier chapters, to a clear\nvision of the political destruction awaiting them; and finally more\nhope of repentance in the people, with a vision of the blessed future\nthat must follow upon it. It is, however, more accurate to say that the\nemphasis of Hosea's prophesying, instead of changing from the Guilt to\nthe Punishment of Israel, changes about the middle of chap. vii. from\ntheir Moral Decay to their Political Decay, and that the description of\nthe latter is modified or interrupted by Two Visions of better things:\none of Jehovah's early guidance of the people, with a great outbreak\nof His Love upon them, in chap. xi.; and one of their future Return to\nJehovah and restoration in chap. xiv. It is on these features that the\ndivision of the following Exposition is arranged.\n\n3. It will be obvious that with a text so corrupt, with a style so\nbroken and incapable of logical division, questions of AUTHENTICITY\nare raised to a pitch of the greatest difficulty. Allusion has been\nmade to the number of glosses which must have been found necessary\nfrom even an early period, and of some of which we can discern the\nproofs.[437] We will deal with these as they occur. But we may here\ndiscuss, as a whole, another class of suspected passages--suspected\nfor the same reason that we saw a number in Amos to be, because of\ntheir reference to Judah. In the Book of Hosea (chaps. iv.-xiv.)\nthey are twelve in number. Only one of them is favourable (iv. 15):\n_Though Israel play the harlot, let not Judah sin._ Kuenen[438]\nargues that this is genuine, on the ground that the peculiar verb\n_to sin_ or _take guilt to oneself_ is used several other times in\nthe book,[439] and that the wish expressed is in consonance with\nwhat he understands to be Hosea's favourable feeling towards Judah.\nYet Hosea nowhere else makes any distinction between Ephraim and\nJudah in the matter of sin, but condemns both equally; and as iv.\n15 f. are to be suspected on other grounds as well, I cannot hold\nthis reference to Judah to be beyond doubt. Nor is the reference in\nviii. 14 genuine: _And Israel forgat her Maker and built temples, and\nJudah multiplied fenced cities, but I will send fire on his cities\nand it shall devour her palaces_. Kuenen[440] refuses to reject the\nreference to Judah, on the ground that without it the rhythm of the\nverse is spoiled; but the fact is the whole verse must go. Chap. v.\n13 forms a climax, which v. 14 only weakens; the style is not like\nHosea's own, and indeed is but an echo of verses of Amos.[441] Nor\ncan we be quite sure about v. 5: _Israel and Ephraim shall stumble by\ntheir iniquities, and_ (LXX.) _stumble also shall Judah with them_;\nor vi. 10, 11: _In Bethel I have seen horrors: there playest thou the\nharlot, Ephraim; there Israel defiles himself; also Judah_ ... (the\nrest of the text is impracticable). In both these passages Judah is\nthe awkward third of a parallelism, and is introduced by an _also_,\nas if an afterthought. Yet the afterthought may be the prophet's own;\nfor in other passages, to which no doubt attaches, he fully includes\nJudah in the sinfulness of Israel. Cornill rejects x. 11, _Judah must\nplough_, but I cannot see on what grounds; as Kuenen says, it has no\nappearance of being an intrusion.[442] In xii. 3 Wellhausen reads\n_Israel_ for _Judah_, but the latter is justified if not rendered\nnecessary by the reference to Judah in ver. 1, which Wellhausen\nadmits. Against the other references--v. 10, _The princes of Judah\nare as removers of boundaries_; v. 12, _I shall be as the moth to\nEphraim, and a worm to the house of Judah_; v. 13, _And Ephraim saw\nhis disease, and Judah his sore_; v. 14, _For I am as a roaring lion\nto Ephraim, and as a young lion to the house of Judah_; vi. 4, _What\nshall I do to thee, Ephraim? what shall I do to thee, Judah?_--there\nare no apparent objections; and they are generally admitted by\ncritics. As Kuenen says, it would have been surprising if Hosea had\nmade no reference to the sister kingdom. His judgment of her is amply\njustified by that of her own citizens, Isaiah and Micah.\n\nOther short passages of doubtful authenticity will be treated as we\ncome to them; but again it may be emphasised that, in a book of such\na style as this, certainty on the subject is impossible.\n\nFinally, there may be given here the only notable addition which the\nSeptuagint makes to the Book of Hosea. It occurs in xiii. 4, after\n_I am Jehovah thy God_: \"That made fast the heavens and founded the\nearth, whose hands founded all the host of the heaven, and I did not\nshow them to thee that thou shouldest follow after them, and I led\nthee up\"--_from the land of Egypt_.\n\nAt first this recalls those apostrophes to Jehovah's power which\nbreak forth in the Book of Amos; and the resemblance has been taken\nto prove that they also are late intrusions. But this both obtrudes\nitself as they do not, and is manifestly of much lower poetical\nvalue. See page 203.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe have now our material clearly before us, and may proceed to the more\nwelcome task of tracing our prophet's life, and expounding his teaching.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[394] See below, pp. 213 f.\n\n[395] _Geschichte_, pp. 93 ff., 214 ff., 439 f.\n\n[396] A list of the more obvious is given by Kuenen, p. 324.\n\n[397] The first chapter in the Hebrew closes with ver. 9.\n\n[398] Cf. this with Amos; above, pp. 192 ff.\n\n[399] K\u00f6nig's arguments (_Einleitung_, 309) in favour of the\npossibility of the genuineness of the verse do not seem to me to be\nconclusive. He thinks the verse admissible because Judah had sinned\nless than Israel; the threat in vv. 4-6 is limited to Israel; the\nphrase _Jehovah their God_ is so peculiar that it is difficult to\nassign it to a mere expander of the text; and if it was a later hand\nthat put in the verse, why did he not alter the judgments against\nJud\u00e6a, which occur further on in the book?\n\n[400] So Cheyne and others, Kuenen adhering. K\u00f6nig agrees that they\nhave been removed from their proper place and the text corrupted.\n\n[401] Rom. ix. 25, 26, which first give the end of Hosea ii. 23 (Heb.\n25), and then the end of i. 10 (Heb. ii. 2). See below, p. 249, _n._ 2.\n\n[402] 721 B.C.\n\n[403] Stade, _Gesch._, I. 577; Cornill, _Einleitung_, who also would\nexclude _no king and no prince_ in iii. 4.\n\n[404] This objection, however, does not hold against the removal of\nmerely _and David_, leaving _their king_.\n\n[405] ii. 7, 11, 14, 17 (Heb.). In i. 4 B-text reads \u1f38\u03bf\u03cd\u03b4\u03b1 for \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0\nwhile Q^{mq} have \u1f38\u03b7\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n[406] In determining the date of the Book of Hosea the title in chap.\ni. is of no use to us: _The Word of Jehovah which was to Hosea ben\nBe'eri in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah,\nand in the days of Jeroboam ben Joash, king of Israel._ This title\nis trebly suspicious. First: the given reigns of Judah and Israel\ndo not correspond; Jeroboam was dead before Uzziah. Second: there\nis no proof either in the First or Second Section of the book that\nHosea prophesied after the reign of Jotham. Third: it is curious that\nin the case of a prophet of Northern Israel kings of Judah should\nbe stated first, and four of them be given while only one king of\nhis own country is placed beside them. On these grounds critics are\nprobably correct who take the title as it stands to be the work of\nsome later Jud\u00e6an scribe who sought to make it correspond to the\ntitles of the Books of Isaiah and Micah. He may have been the same\nwho added chap. i. 7. The original form of the title probably was\n_The Word of God which was to Hosea son of Be'eri in the days of\nJeroboam ben Joash, king of Israel_, and designed only for the First\nSection of the book, chaps, i.-iii.\n\n[407] vii. 7. There are also other passages which, while they may\nbe referred, as they stand, to the whole succession of illegitimate\ndynasties in Northern Israel from the beginning to the end of that\nkingdom, more probably reflect the same ten years of special anarchy\nand disorder after the death of Jeroboam II. See vii. 3 ff.; viii. 4,\nwhere the illegitimate kingmaking is coupled with the idolatry of the\nNorthern Kingdom; xiii. 10, 11.\n\n[408] x. 3, 7, 8, 15.\n\n[409] ix. 15.\n\n[410] vi. 8, 9.\n\n[411] vii. 1.\n\n[412] vii. 11.\n\n[413] x. 6.\n\n[414] xiii. 12 f.\n\n[415] The chronology of these years is exceedingly uncertain.\nJeroboam was dead about 743; in 738 Menahem gave tribute to Assyria;\nin 734 Tiglath-Pileser had conquered Aram, Gilead and Galilee in\nresponse to King Ahaz, who had a year or two before been attacked by\nRezin of Aram and Pekah of Israel.\n\n[416] 2 Kings xv. 8-16. It may be to this appearance of three kings\nwithin one month that there was originally an allusion in the now\nobscure verse of Hosea, v. 7.\n\n[417] 2 Kings xv. 17-22.\n\n[418] Or prince, \u05e9\u05c2\u05e8: cf. Hosea's denunciation of the \u05e9\u05c2\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd as rebels.\n\n[419] Isa. vii.; 2 Kings xv. 37, 38.\n\n[420] Some have found a later allusion in chap. x. 14: _like unto the\ndestruction_ of (?) _Shalman_ (of ?) _Beth' Arbe'l_. Pusey, p. 5 _b_,\nand others take this to allude to a destruction of the Galilean Arbela,\nthe modern Irbid, by Salmanassar IV., who ascended the Assyrian throne\nin 727 and besieged Samaria in 724 ff. But since the construction of\nthe phrase leaves it doubtful whether the name Shalman is that or the\nagent or object of the destruction, and whether, if the agent, he be\none of the Assyrian Salmanassars or a Moabite King Salman _c._ 730\nB.C., it is impossible to make use of the verse in fixing the date of\nthe Book of Hosea. See further, p. 289. Wellhausen omits.\n\n[421] v. 1; vi. 8; xii. 12: cf. W. R. Smith, _Prophets_, 156.\n\n[422] Cf. W. R. Smith, _l.c._\n\n[423] Cf. W. R. Smith, _Prophets_, 157: Hosea's \"language and the\nmovement of his thoughts are far removed from the simplicity and\nself-control which characterise the prophecy of Amos. Indignation and\nsorrow, tenderness and severity, faith in the sovereignty of Jehovah's\nlove, and a despairing sense of Israel's infidelity are woven together\nin a sequence which has no logical plan, but is determined by the\nbattle and alternate victory of contending emotions; and the swift\ntransitions, the fragmentary unbalanced utterance, the half-developed\nallusions, that make his prophecy so difficult to the commentator,\nexpress the agony of this inward conflict.\"\n\n[424] See above, p. 114.\n\n[425] _Pr\u00e6f. in Duod. Prophetas._\n\n[426] Especially in chap. vii.\n\n[427] As in xi. 2 _b_.\n\n[428] This is especially the case in x. 11-13; xi. 4; xiv. 5.\n\n[429] _E.g._ vi. 5 _b_: M.T. \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05d0\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8\u05d9\u05da which is nonsense; LXX.\n\u05db\u05d0\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8\u05d9, _My judgment shall go forth like light._ xi. 2: M.T.\n\u05de\u05b4\u05e4\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05dd; LXX. \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd \u05de\u05b4\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b7\u05d9.\n\n[430] iv. 4, \u05e2\u05de\u05d9 for \u05e2\u05de\u05da; 8, \u05e0\u05e4\u05e9\u05dd for \u05e0\u05e4--perhaps; 13, \u05e6\u05b4\u05dc\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 for\n\u05e6\u05b4\u05dc\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4\u05bc; v. 2; vi. 2 (possibly); viii. 4, read \u05d9\u05db\u05e8\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc; ix. 2; xi. 2,\n3; xi. 5, 6, where for \u05dc\u05d0 read \u05dc\u05d5; 10, read \u05dc\u05b5\u05b6\u05da\u05b0; xii. 9; xiv. 9\n_a_, \u05dc\u05b9\u05d5 for \u05dc\u05b4\u05d9. On the other hand, they are either improbable or\nquite wrong, as in v. 2 _b_; vi. 2 (but the LXX. may be right here);\nvii 1 _b_; xi. 1, 4; xii. 5; xiii. 14, 15 (ter.).\n\n[431] v. 5 (so as to change the tense: _and Judah shall stumble_);\nxii. 3, etc.\n\n[432] vi. 3; viii. 10, 13; ix. 2; x. 4, 13 _b_, 15 (probably); xii.\n2; xiii. 9; xiv. 3. Wrong tense, xii. 11. Cf. also vi. 3.\n\n[433] _E.g._ viii. 13.\n\n[434] Cf. the Hebrew and Greek, of _e.g._, iv. 10, 11, 12; vi. 9, 10;\nviii. 5, 6; ix. 8, 9.\n\n[435] viii. 13 (14 must be omitted); ix. 17.\n\n[436] _Introd._ 284.\n\n[437] _E.g._ iv. 15 (?); vi. 11-vii. 1 (?); vii. 4; viii. 2; xii. 6.\n\n[438] _Einl._, 323.\n\n[439] \u05d0\u05e9\u05dd, v. 15; x. 2; xiii. 1; xiv. 1.\n\n[440] P. 313.\n\n[441] viii. 14 is also rejected by Wellhausen and Cornill.\n\n[442] _Loc. cit._\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIII\n\n _THE PROBLEM THAT AMOS LEFT_\n\n\nAmos was a preacher of righteousness almost wholly in its judicial\nand punitive offices. Exposing the moral conditions of society in\nhis day, emphasising on the one hand its obduracy and on the other\nthe intolerableness of it, he asserted that nothing could avert the\ninevitable doom--neither Israel's devotion to Jehovah nor Jehovah's\ninterest in Israel. _You alone have I known of all the families of\nthe ground: therefore will I visit upon you all your iniquities._\nThe visitation was to take place in war and in the captivity of the\npeople. This is practically the whole message of the prophet Amos.\n\nThat he added to it the promise of restoration which now closes his\nbook, we have seen to be extremely improbable.[443] Yet even if that\npromise is his own, Amos does not tell us how the restoration is to\nbe brought about. With wonderful insight and patience he has traced\nthe captivity of Israel to moral causes. But he does not show what\nmoral change in the exiles is to justify their restoration, or by\nwhat means such a moral change is to be effected. We are left to\ninfer the conditions and the means of redemption from the principles\nwhich Amos enforced while there yet seemed time to pray for the\ndoomed people: _Seek the Lord and ye shall live_.[444] According to\nthis, the moral renewal of Israel must precede their restoration; but\nthe prophet seems to make no great effort to effect the renewal. In\nshort Amos illustrates the easily-forgotten truth that a preacher to\nthe conscience is not necessarily a preacher of repentance.\n\nOf the great antitheses between which religion moves, Law and Love,\nAmos had therefore been the prophet of Law. But we must not imagine\nthat the association of Love with the Deity was strange to him.\nThis could not be to any Israelite who remembered the past of his\npeople--the romance of their origins and early struggles for freedom.\nIsrael had always felt the grace of their God; and, unless we be\nwrong about the date of the great poem in the end of Deuteronomy,\nthey had lately celebrated that grace in lines of exquisite beauty\nand tenderness:--\n\n _He found him in a desert land,_\n _In a waste and a howling wilderness._\n _He compassed him about, cared for him,_\n _Kept him as the apple of His eye._\n _As an eagle stirreth up his nest,_\n _Fluttereth over his young,_\n _Spreadeth his wings, taketh them,_\n _Beareth them up on his pinions--_\n _So Jehovah alone led him._[445]\n\nThe patience of the Lord with their waywardness and their stubbornness\nhad been the ethical influence on Israel's life at a time when\nthey had probably neither code of law nor system of doctrine. _Thy\ngentleness_, as an early Psalmist says for his people, _Thy gentleness\nhath made me great_.[446] Amos is not unaware of this ancient grace of\nJehovah. But he speaks of it in a fashion which shows that he feels it\nto be exhausted and without hope for his generation. _I brought you up\nout of the land of Egypt, and led you forty years in the wilderness,\nto possess the land of the Amorites. And I raised up of your sons for\nprophets and of your young men for Nazirites._[447] But this can now\nonly fill the cup of the nation's sin. _You alone have I known of\nall the families of the earth: therefore will I visit upon you all\nyour iniquities._[448] Jehovah's ancient Love but strengthens now the\njustice and the impetus of His Law.\n\nWe perceive, then, the problem which Amos left to prophecy. It\nwas not to discover Love in the Deity whom he had so absolutely\nidentified with Law. The Love of God needed no discovery among a\npeople with the Deliverance, the Exodus, the Wilderness and the Gift\nof the Land in their memories. But the problem was to prove in God so\ngreat and new a mercy as was capable of matching that Law, which the\nabuse of His millennial gentleness now only the more fully justified.\nThere was needed a prophet to arise with as keen a conscience of\nLaw as Amos himself, and yet affirm that Love was greater still; to\nadmit that Israel were doomed, and yet promise their redemption by\nprocesses as reasonable and as ethical as those by which the doom\nhad been rendered inevitable. The prophet of Conscience had to be\nfollowed by the prophet of Repentance.\n\nSuch an one was found in Hosea, the son of Be'eri, a citizen and\nprobably a priest of Northern Israel, whose very name, _Salvation_,\nthe synonym of Joshua and of Jesus, breathed the larger hope, which\nit was his glory to bear to his people. Before we see how for this\ntask Hosea was equipped with the love and sympathy which Amos lacked,\nlet us do two things. Let us appreciate the magnitude of the task\nitself, set to him first of prophets; and let us remind ourselves\nthat, greatly as he achieved it, the task was not one which could be\nachieved even by him once for all, but that it presents itself to\nreligion again and again in the course of her development.\n\nFor the first of these duties, it is enough to recall how much all\nsubsequent prophecy derives from Hosea. We shall not exaggerate if we\nsay that there is no truth uttered by later prophets about the Divine\nGrace, which we do not find in germ in him. Isaiah of Jerusalem was a\ngreater statesman and a more powerful writer, but he had not Hosea's\ntenderness and insight into motive and character. Hosea's marvellous\nsympathy both with the people and with God is sufficient to foreshadow\nevery grief, every hope, every gospel, which make the books of Jeremiah\nand the great Prophet of the Exile exhaustless in their spiritual value\nfor mankind. Those others explored the kingdom of God: it was Hosea\nwho took it by storm.[449] He is the first prophet of Grace, Israel's\nearliest Evangelist; yet with as keen a sense of law, and of the\ninevitableness of ethical discipline, as Amos himself.\n\nBut the task which Hosea accomplished was not one that could be\naccomplished once for all. The interest of his book is not merely\nhistorical. For so often as a generation is shocked out of its\nold religious ideals, as Amos shocked Israel, by a realism and a\ndiscovery of law, which have no respect for ideals, however ancient\nand however dear to the human heart, but work their own pitiless way\nto doom inevitable; so often must the Book of Hosea have a practical\nvalue for living men. At such a crisis we stand to-day. The older\nEvangelical assurance, the older Evangelical ideals have to some\nextent been rendered impossible by the realism to which the sciences,\nboth physical and historical, have most healthily recalled us, and by\ntheir wonderful revelation of Law working through nature and society\nwithout respect to our creeds and pious hopes. The question presses:\nIs it still possible to believe in repentance and conversion, still\npossible to preach the power of God to save, whether the individual\nor society, from the forces of heredity and of habit? We can at least\nlearn how Hosea mastered the very similar problem which Amos left to\nhim, and how, with a moral realism no less stern than his predecessor\nand a moral standard every whit as high, he proclaimed Love to be\nthe ultimate element in religion; not only because it moves man to\na repentance and God to a redemption more sovereign than any law;\nbut because if neglected or abused, whether as love of man or love\nof God, it enforces a doom still more inexorable than that required\nby violated truth or by outraged justice. Love our Saviour, Love our\nalmighty and unfailing Father, but, just because of this, Love our\nmost awful Judge--we turn to the life and the message in which this\neternal theme was first unfolded.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[443] See above, pp. 193 ff.\n\n[444] v. 4.\n\n[445] Deut. xxxii. 10-12: a song probably earlier than the eighth\ncentury. But some put it later.\n\n[446] Psalm xviii.\n\n[447] ii. 10 f.\n\n[448] iii. 2.\n\n[449] Matt. xi. 12.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIV\n\n _THE STORY OF THE PRODIGAL WIFE_\n\n HOSEA i.-iii.\n\n\nIt has often been remarked that, unlike the first Doomster of Israel,\nIsrael's first Evangelist was one of themselves, a native and\ncitizen, perhaps even a priest, of the land to which he was sent.\nThis appears even in his treatment of the stage and soil of his\nministry. Contrast him in this respect with Amos.\n\nIn the Book of Amos we have few glimpses of the scenery of Israel,\nand these always by flashes of the lightnings of judgment: the towns\nin drought or earthquake or siege; the vineyards and orchards under\nlocusts or mildew; Carmel itself desolate, or as a hiding-place from\nGod's wrath.\n\nBut Hosea's love steals across his whole land like the dew, provoking\nevery separate scent and colour, till all Galilee lies before us,\nlustrous and fragrant as nowhere else outside the parables of Jesus.\nThe Book of Amos, when it would praise God's works, looks to the\nstars. But the poetry of Hosea clings about his native soil like its\ntrailing vines. If he appeals to the heavens, it is only that they\nmay speak to the earth, and the earth to the corn and the wine, and\nthe corn and the wine to Jezreel.[450] Even the wild beasts--and\nHosea tells us of their cruelty almost as much as Amos--he cannot\nshut out of the hope of his love: _I will make a covenant for them\nwith the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with\nthe creeping things of the ground_.[451] God's love-gifts to His\npeople are corn and wool, flax and oil; while spiritual blessings\nare figured in the joys of them who sow and reap. With Hosea we feel\nall the seasons of the Syrian year: early rain and latter rain, the\nfirst flush of the young corn, the scent of the vine blossom, the\n_first ripe fig of the fig-tree in her first season_, the bursting of\nthe lily; the wild vine trailing on the hedge, the field of tares,\nthe beauty of the full olive in sunshine and breeze; the mists and\nheavy dews of a summer morning in Ephraim, the night winds laden with\nthe air of the mountains, _the scent of Lebanon_.[452] Or it is the\ndearer human sights in valley and field: the smoke from the chimney,\nthe chaff from the threshing-floor, the doves startled to their\ntowers, the fowler and his net; the breaking up of the fallow ground,\nthe harrowing of the clods, the reapers, the heifer that treadeth out\nthe corn; the team of draught oxen surmounting the steep road, and at\nthe top the kindly driver setting in food to their jaws.[453]\n\nWhere, I say, do we find anything like this save in the parables\nof Jesus? For the love of Hosea was as the love of that greater\nGalilean: however high, however lonely it soared, it was yet rooted\nin the common life below, and fed with the unfailing grace of a\nthousand homely sources.\n\nBut just as the Love which first showed itself in the sunny Parables\nof Galilee passed onward to Gethsemane and the Cross, so the love of\nHosea, that had wakened with the spring lilies and dewy summer mornings\nof the North, had also, ere his youth was spent, to meet its agony and\nshame. These came upon the prophet in his home, and in her in whom so\nloyal and tender a heart had hoped to find his chiefest sanctuary next\nto God. There are, it is true, some of the ugliest facts of human life\nabout this prophet's experience; but the message is one very suited to\nour own hearts and times. Let us read this story of the Prodigal Wife\nas we do that other Galilean tale of the Prodigal Son. There as well\nas here are harlots; but here as well as there is the clear mirror of\nthe Divine Love. For the Bible never shuns realism when it would expose\nthe exceeding hatefulness of sin or magnify the power of God's love to\nredeem. To an age which is always treating conjugal infidelity either\nas a matter of comedy or as a problem of despair, the tale of Hosea\nand his wife may still become, what it proved to his own generation, a\ngospel full of love and hope.\n\nThe story, and how it led Hosea to understand God's relations to\nsinful men, is told in the first three chapters of his book. It opens\nwith the very startling sentence: _The beginning of the word of\nJehovah to Hosea:--And Jehovah said to Hosea, Go, take thee a wife of\nharlotry and children of harlotry: for the Land hath committed great\nharlotry in departing from Jehovah._[454]\n\nThe command was obeyed. _And he went and took Gomer, daughter of\nDiblaim;_[455] _and she conceived, and bare to him a son. And\nJehovah said unto him, Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little and\nI shall visit the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu, and will\nbring to an end the kingdom of the house of Israel; and it shall\nbe on that day that I shall break the bow of Israel in the Vale\nof Jezreel_--the classic battle-field of Israel.[456] _And she\nconceived again, and bare a daughter; and He said to him, Call her\nname Un-Loved_, or _That-never-knew-a-Father's-Pity;_[457] _for I\nwill not again have pity_--such pity as a Father hath--_on the house\nof Israel, that I should fully forgive them._[458] _And she weaned\nUn-Pitied, and conceived, and bare a son. And He said, Call his name\nNot-My-People; for ye are not My people, and I--I am not yours._[459]\n\nIt is not surprising that divers interpretations have been put upon\nthis troubled tale. The words which introduce it are so startling\nthat very many have held it to be an allegory, or parable, invented\nby the prophet to illustrate, by familiar human figures, what\nwas at that period the still difficult conception of the Love of\nGod for sinful men. But to this well-intended argument there are\ninsuperable objections. It implies that Hosea had first awakened\nto the relations of Jehovah and Israel--He faithful and full of\naffection, she unfaithful and thankless--and that then, in order to\nillustrate the relations, he had invented the story. To that we have\nan adequate reply. In the first place, though it were possible, it\nis extremely improbable, that such a man should have invented such\na tale about his wife, or, if he was unmarried, about himself. But,\nin the second place, he says expressly that his domestic experience\nwas the _beginning of Jehovah's word to him_. That is, he passed\nthrough it first, and only afterwards, with the sympathy and insight\nthus acquired, he came to appreciate Jehovah's relation to Israel.\nFinally, the style betrays narrative rather than parable. The simple\nfacts are told; there is an absence of elaboration; there is no\neffort to make every detail symbolic; the names Gomer and Diblaim are\napparently those of real persons; every attempt to attach a symbolic\nvalue to them has failed.\n\nShe was, therefore, no dream, this woman, but flesh and blood: the\nsorrow, the despair, the sphinx of the prophet's life; yet a sphinx\nwho in the end yielded her riddle to love.\n\nAccordingly a large number of other interpreters have taken the story\nthroughout as the literal account of actual facts. This is the theory\nof many of the Latin and Greek Fathers,[460] of many of the Puritans\nand of Dr. Pusey--by one of those agreements into which, from such\nopposite schools, all these commentators are not infrequently drawn\nby their common captivity to the letter of Scripture.[461] When you\nask them, How then do you justify that first strange word of God\nto Hosea,[462] if you take it literally and believe that Hosea was\ncharged to marry a woman of public shame? they answer either that\nsuch an evil may be justified by the bare word of God, or that it was\nwell worth the end, the salvation of a lost soul.[463] And indeed\nthis tragedy would be invested with an even greater pathos if it\nwere true that the human hero had passed through a self-sacrifice\nso unusual, had incurred such a shame for such an end. The\ninterpretation, however, seems forbidden by the essence of the story.\nHad not Hosea's wife been pure when he married her she could not have\nserved as a type of the Israel whose earliest relations to Jehovah\nhe describes as innocent. And this is confirmed by other features of\nthe book: by the high ideal which Hosea has of marriage, and by that\nsense of early goodness and early beauty passing away like morning\nmist, which is so often and so pathetically expressed that we cannot\nbut catch in it the echo of his own experience. As one has said to\nwhom we owe, more than to any other, the exposition of the gospel in\nHosea,[464] \"The struggle of Hosea's shame and grief when he found\nhis wife unfaithful is altogether inconceivable unless his first love\nhad been pure and full of trust in the purity of its object.\"\n\nHow then are we to reconcile with this the statement of that command\nto take a wife of the character so frankly described? In this way--and\nwe owe the interpretation to the same lamented scholar.[465] When,\nsome years after his marriage, Hosea at last began to be aware of the\ncharacter of her whom he had taken to his home, and while he still\nbrooded upon it, God revealed to him why He who knoweth all things\nfrom the beginning had suffered His servant to marry such a woman; and\nHosea, by a very natural anticipation, in which he is imitated by other\nprophets,[466] pushed back his own knowledge of God's purpose to the\ndate when that purpose began actually to be fulfilled, the day of his\nbetrothal. This, though he was all unconscious of its fatal future, had\nbeen to Hosea the beginning of the word of the Lord. On that uncertain\nvoyage he had sailed with sealed orders.\n\nNow this is true to nature, and may be matched from our own experience.\n\"The beginning of God's word\" to any of us--where does it lie? Does it\nlie in the first time the meaning of our life became articulate, and we\nwere able to utter it to others? Ah no; it always lies far behind that,\nin facts and in relationships, of the Divine meaning of which we are\nat the time unconscious, though now we know. How familiar this is in\nrespect to the sorrows and adversities of life: dumb, deadening things\nthat fall on us at the time with no more voice than clods falling on\ncoffins of dead men, we have been able to read them afterwards as the\nclear call of God to our souls. But what we thus so readily admit about\nthe sorrows of life may be equally true of any of those relations which\nwe enter with light and unawed hearts, conscious only of the novelty\nand the joy of them. It is most true of the love which meets a man as\nit met Hosea in his opening manhood.\n\nHow long Hosea took to discover his shame he indicates by a few\nhints which he suffers to break from the delicate reserve of his\nstory. He calls the first child his own; and the boy's name, though\nominous of the nation's fate, has no trace of shame upon it. Hosea's\nJezreel was as Isaiah's Shear-Jashub or Maher-shalal-hash-baz. But\nHosea does not claim the second child; and in the name of this little\nlass, Lo-Ruhamah, _she-that-never-knew-a-father's-love_, orphan not\nby death but by her mother's sin, we find proof of the prophet's\nawakening to the tragedy of his home. Nor does he own the third\nchild, named _Not-my-people_, that could also mean _No-kin-of-mine_.\nThe three births must have taken at least six years;[467] and once at\nleast, but probably oftener, Hosea had forgiven the woman, and till\nthe sixth year she stayed in his house. Then either he put her from\nhim, or she went her own way. She sold herself for money, and finally\ndrifted, like all of her class, into slavery.[468]\n\nSuch were the facts of Hosea's grief, and we have now to attempt to\nunderstand how that grief became his gospel. We may regard the stages\nof the process as two: first, when he was led to feel that his sorrow\nwas the sorrow of the whole nation; and, second, when he comprehended\nthat it was of similar kind to the sorrow of God Himself.\n\nWhile Hosea brooded upon his pain one of the first things he would\nremember would be the fact, which he so frequently illustrates, that\nthe case of his home was not singular, but common and characteristic\nof his day. Take the evidence of his book, and there must have been\nin Israel many such wives as his own. He describes their sin as the\nbesetting sin of the nation, and the plague of Israel's life. But to\nlose your own sorrow in the vaster sense of national trouble--that\nis the first consciousness of a duty and a mission. In the analogous\nvice of intemperance among ourselves we have seen the same experience\noperate again and again. How many a man has joined the public warfare\nagainst that sin, because he was aroused to its national consequences\nby the ruin it had brought to his own home! And one remembers from\nrecent years a more illustrious instance, where a domestic grief--it\nis true of a very different kind--became not dissimilarly the opening\nof a great career of service to the people:--\n\n \"I was in Leamington, and Mr. Cobden called on me. I was then in\n the depths of grief--I may almost say of despair, for the light\n and sunshine of my house had been extinguished. All that was left\n on earth of my young wife, except the memory of a sainted life and\n a too brief happiness, was lying still and cold in the chamber\n above us. Mr. Cobden called on me as his friend, and addressed\n me, as you may suppose, with words of condolence. After a time he\n looked up and said: 'There are thousands and thousands of homes in\n England at this moment where wives and mothers and children are\n dying of hunger. Now, when the first paroxysm of your grief is\n passed, I would advise you to come with me, and we will never rest\n until the Corn Laws are repealed.'\"[469]\n\nNot dissimilarly was Hosea's pain overwhelmed by the pain of his\npeople. He remembered that there were in Israel thousands of homes\nlike his own. Anguish gave way to sympathy. The mystery became the\nstimulus to a mission.\n\nBut, again, Hosea traces this sin of his day to the worship of\nstrange gods. He tells the fathers of Israel, for instance, that they\nneed not be surprised at the corruption of their wives and daughters\nwhen they themselves bring home from the heathen rites the infection\nof light views of love.[470] That is to say, the many sins against\nhuman love in Israel, the wrong done to his own heart in his own\nhome, Hosea connects with the wrong done to the Love of God, by His\npeople's desertion of Him for foreign and impure rites. Hosea's own\nsorrow thus became a key to the sorrow of God. Had he loved this\nwoman, cherished and honoured her, borne with and forgiven her, only\nto find at the last his love spurned and hers turned to sinful men:\nso also had the Love of God been treated by His chosen people, and\nthey had fallen to the loose worship of idols.\n\nHosea was the more naturally led to compare his relations to his wife\nwith Jehovah's to Israel, by certain religious beliefs current among\nthe Semitic peoples. It was common to nearly all Semitic religions\nto express the union of a god with his land or with his people by\nthe figure of marriage. The title which Hosea so often applies to\nthe heathen deities, Ba'al, meant originally not \"lord\" of his\nworshippers, but \"possessor\" and endower of his land, its husband and\nfertiliser. A fertile land was \"a land of Ba'al,\" or \"Be'ulah,\" that\nis, \"possessed\" or \"blessed by a Ba'al.\"[471] Under the fertility\nwas counted not only the increase of field and flock, but the human\nincrease as well; and thus a nation could speak of themselves as\nthe children of the Land, their mother, and of her Ba'al, their\nfather.[472] When Hosea, then, called Jehovah the husband of Israel,\nit was not an entirely new symbol which he invented. Up to his time,\nhowever, the marriage of Heaven and Earth, of a god and his people,\nseems to have been conceived in a physical form which ever tended to\nbecome more gross; and was expressed, as Hosea points out, by rites\nof a sensual and debasing nature, with the most disastrous effects on\nthe domestic morals of the people. By an inspiration, whose ethical\ncharacter is very conspicuous, Hosea breaks the physical connection\naltogether. Jehovah's Bride is not the Land, but the People, and\nHis marriage with her is conceived wholly as a moral relation. Not\nthat He has no connection with the physical fruits of the land: corn,\nwine, oil, wool and flax. But these are represented only as the\nsigns and ornaments of the marriage, love-gifts from the husband to\nthe wife.[473] The marriage itself is purely moral: _I will betroth\nher to Me in righteousness and justice, in leal love and tender\nmercies_.[474] From her in return are demanded faithfulness and\ngrowing knowledge of her Lord.\n\nIt is the re-creation of an Idea. Slain and made carrion by the\nheathen religions, the figure is restored to life by Hosea. And this\nis a life everlasting. Prophet and apostle, the Israel of Jehovah,\nthe Church of Christ, have alike found in Hosea's figure an unfailing\nsignificance and charm. Here we cannot trace the history of the\nfigure; but at least we ought to emphasise the creative power which\nits recovery to life proves to have been inherent in prophecy. This\nis one of those triumphs of which the God of Israel said: _Behold, I\nmake all things new_.[475]\n\nHaving dug his figure from the mire and set it upon the rock, Hosea\nsends it on its way with all boldness. If Jehovah be thus the husband\nof Israel, _her first husband, the husband of her youth_, then\nall her pursuit of the Ba'alim is unfaithfulness to her marriage\nvows. But she is worse than an adulteress; she is a harlot. She has\nfallen for gifts. Here the historical facts wonderfully assisted\nthe prophet's metaphor. It was a fact that Israel and Jehovah were\nfirst wedded in the wilderness upon conditions, which by the very\ncircumstances of desert life could have little or no reference to\nthe fertility of the earth, but were purely personal and moral. And\nit was also a fact that Israel's declension from Jehovah came after\nher settlement in Canaan, and was due to her discovery of other\ndeities, in possession of the soil, and adored by the natives as the\ndispensers of its fertility. Israel fell under these superstitions,\nand, although she still formally acknowledged her bond to Jehovah,\nyet in order to get her fields blessed and her flocks made fertile,\nher orchards protected from blight and her fleeces from scab, she\nwent after the local Ba'alim.[476] With bitter scorn Hosea points out\nthat there was no true love in this: it was the mercenariness of a\nharlot, selling herself for gifts.[477] And it had the usual results.\nThe children whom Israel bore were not her husband's.[478] The new\ngeneration in Israel grew up in ignorance of Jehovah, with characters\nand lives strange to His Spirit. They were Lo-Ruhamah: He could not\nfeel towards them such pity as a father hath.[479] They were Lo-Ammi:\nnot at all His people. All was in exact parallel to Hosea's own\nexperience with his wife; and only the real pain of that experience\ncould have made the man brave enough to use it as a figure of his\nGod's treatment by Israel.\n\nFollowing out the human analogy, the next step should have been for\nJehovah to divorce His erring spouse. But Jehovah reveals to the\nprophet that this is not His way. For He is _God and not man, the\nHoly One in the midst of thee. How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?\nHow shall I surrender thee, O Israel? My heart is turned within Me,\nMy compassions are kindled together!_\n\nJehovah will seek, find and bring back the wanderer. Yet the\nprocess shall not be easy. The gospel which Hosea here preaches\nis matched in its great tenderness by its full recognition of the\nethical requirements of the case. Israel may not be restored without\nrepentance, and cannot repent without disillusion and chastisement.\nGod will therefore show her that her lovers, the Ba'alim, are unable\nto assure to her the gifts for which she followed them. These are His\ncorn, His wine, His wool and His flax, and He will take them away\nfor a time. Nay more, as if mere drought and blight might still be\nregarded as some Ba'al's work, He who has always manifested Himself\nby great historic deeds will do so again. He will remove herself from\nthe land, and leave it a waste and a desolation. The whole passage\nruns as follows, introduced by the initial _Therefore_ of judgment:--\n\n_Therefore, behold, I am going to hedge_[480] _up her_[481] _way with\nthorns, and build her_[482] _a wall, so that she find not her paths.\nAnd she shall pursue her paramours and shall not come upon them, seek\nthem and shall not find them; and she shall say, Let me go and return\nto my first husband, for it was better for me then than now. She knew\nnot, then, that it was I who gave her the corn and the wine and the\noil; yea, silver I heaped upon her and gold--they worked it up for\nthe Ba'al!_[483] Israel had deserted the religion that was historical\nand moral for the religion that was physical. But the historical\nreligion was the physical one. Jehovah who had brought Israel to the\nland was also the God of the Land. He would prove this by taking\naway its blessings. _Therefore I will turn and take away My corn in\nits time and My wine in its season, and I will withdraw My wool and\nMy flax that should have covered her nakedness. And now_--the other\ninitial of judgment--_I will lay bare her shame to the eyes of her\nlovers, and no man shall rescue her from My hand. And I will make\nan end of all her joyaunce, her pilgrimages, her New-Moons and her\nSabbaths, with every festival; and I will destroy her vines and her\nfigs of which she said, \"They are a gift, mine own, which my lovers\ngave me,\" and I will turn them to jungle and the wild beast shall\ndevour them. So shall I visit upon her the days of the Ba'alim, when\nshe used to offer incense to them, and decked herself with her rings\nand her jewels and went after her paramours, but Me she forgat--'tis\nthe oracle of Jehovah._ All this implies something more than such\nnatural disasters as those in which Amos saw the first chastisements\nof the Lord. Each of the verses suggests, not only a devastation of\nthe land by war,[484] but the removal of the people into captivity.\nEvidently, therefore, Hosea, writing about 745, had in view a speedy\ninvasion by Assyria, an invasion which was always followed up by the\nexile of the people subdued.\n\nThis is next described, with all plainness, under the figure of\nIsrael's early wanderings in the wilderness, but is emphasised as\nhappening only for the end of the people's penitence and restoration.\nThe new hope is so melodious that it carries the language into metre.\n\n _Therefore, lo! I am to woo her, and I will bring her to the\n wilderness,_\n _And I will speak home to her heart._\n _And from there I will give to her her vineyards,_\n _And the Valley of Achor for a doorway of hope._\n _And there she shall answer_ Me _as in the days of her youth,_\n _And as the day when she came up from the land of Mi\u1e63raim._\n\nTo us the terms of this passage may seem formal and theological.\nBut to every Israelite some of these terms must have brought back\nthe days of his own wooing. _I will speak home to her heart_ is a\nforcible expression, like the German \"an das Herz\" or the sweet\nScottish \"it cam' up roond my heart,\" and was used in Israel as\nfrom man to woman when he won her.[485] But the other terms have an\nequal charm. The prophet, of course, does not mean that Israel shall\nbe literally taken back to the desert. But he describes her coming\nExile under that ancient figure, in order to surround her penitence\nwith the associations of her innocency and her youth. By the grace\nof God, everything shall begin again as at first. The old terms\n_wilderness_, _the giving of vineyards_, _Valley of Achor_, are, as\nit were, the wedding ring restored.\n\nAs a result of all this (whether the words be by Hosea or another),[486]\n\n _It shall be in that day--'tis Jehovah's oracle--that thou\n shalt call Me, My husband,_\n _And thou shalt not again call Me, My Ba'al:_\n _For I will take away the names of the Ba'alim from her\n mouth,_\n _And they shall no more be remembered by their names._\n\nThere follows a picture of the ideal future, in which--how unlike the\nvision that now closes the Book of Amos!--moral and spiritual beauty,\nthe peace of the land and the redemption of the people, are wonderfully\nmingled together, in a style so characteristic of Hosea's heart. It is\nhard to tell where the rhythmical prose passes into actual metre.\n\n_And I will make for them a covenant in that day with the wild beasts,\nand with the birds of the heavens, and with the creeping things of the\nground; and the bow and the sword and battle will I break from the\nland, and I will make you to dwell in safety. And I will betroth thee\nto Me for ever, and I will betroth thee to Me in righteousness and in\njustice, in leal love and in tender mercies; and I will betroth thee to\nMe in faithfulness, and thou shalt know Jehovah._\n\n_And it shall be on that day I will speak--'tis the oracle of\nJehovah--I will speak to the heavens, and they shall speak to the\nearth; and the earth shall speak to the corn and the wine and the\noil, and they shall speak to Jezreel, the scattered like seed_ across\nmany lands; _but I will sow him_[487] _for Myself in the land: and\nI will have a father's pity upon Un-Pitied; and to Not-My-People_ I\nwill say. _My people thou art! and he shall say, My God!_[488]\n\nThe circle is thus completed on the terms from which we started. The\nthree names which Hosea gave to the children, evil omens of Israel's\nfate, are reversed, and the people restored to the favour and love of\ntheir God.\n\nWe might expect this glory to form the culmination of the prophecy.\nWhat fuller prospect could be imagined than that we see in the close\nof the second chapter? With a wonderful grace, however, the prophecy\nturns back from this sure vision of the restoration of the people as\na whole, to pick up again the individual from whom it had started,\nand whose unclean rag of a life had fluttered out of sight before\nthe national fortunes sweeping in upon the scene. This was needed to\ncrown the story--this return to the individual.\n\n_And Jehovah said unto me, Once more go, love a wife that is loved\nof a paramour and is an adulteress,_[489] _as Jehovah loveth the\nchildren of Israel, the while they are turning to other gods, and love\nraisin-cakes_--probably some element in the feasts of the gods of the\nland, the givers of the grape. _Then I bought her to me for fifteen\npieces of silver and a homer of barley and a lethech of wine._[490]\n_And I said to her, For many days shall thou abide for me alone; thou\nshall not play the harlot, thou shall not be for any husband; and\nI for my part also shall be so towards thee. For the days are many\nthat the children of Israel shall abide without a king and without a\nprince, without sacrifice and without ma\u00e7\u00e7ebah, and without ephod and\nteraphim._[491] _Afterwards the children of Israel shall turn and seek\nJehovah their God and David their king, and shall be in awe of Jehovah\nand towards His goodness in the end of the days._[492]\n\nDo not let us miss the fact that the story of the wife's restoration\nfollows that of Israel's, although the story of the wife's\nunfaithfulness had come before that of Israel's apostasy. For this\norder means that, while the prophet's private pain preceded his\nsympathy with God's pain, it was not he who set God, but God who set\nhim, the example of forgiveness. The man learned the God's sorrow out\nof his own sorrow; but conversely he was taught to forgive and redeem\nhis wife only by seeing God forgive and redeem the people. In other\nwords, the Divine was suggested by the human pain; yet the Divine Grace\nwas not started by any previous human grace, but, on the contrary,\nwas itself the precedent and origin of the latter. This is in harmony\nwith all Hosea's teaching. God forgives because _He is God and not\nman_.[493] Our pain with those we love helps us to understand God's\npain; but it is not our love that leads us to believe in His love. On\nthe contrary, all human grace is but the reflex of the Divine. So St.\nPaul: _Even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye_. So St. John: _We\nlove Him_, and one another, _because He first loved us_.\n\nBut this return from the nation to the individual has another\ninterest. Gomer's redemption is not the mere formal completion of the\nparallel between her and her people. It is, as the story says, an\nimpulse of the Divine Love, recognised even then in Israel as seeking\nthe individual. He who followed Hagar into the wilderness, who met\nJacob at Bethel and forgat not the slave Joseph in prison,[494]\nremembers also Hosea's wife. His love is not satisfied with His\nNation-Bride: He remembers this single outcast. It is the Shepherd\nleaving the ninety-and-nine in the fold to seek the one lost sheep.\n\n * * * * *\n\nFor Hosea himself his home could never be the same as it was at the\nfirst. _And I said to her, For many days shalt thou abide, as far as\nI am concerned, alone. Thou shalt not play the harlot. Thou shalt not\nbe for a husband: and I on my side also shall be so towards thee._\nDiscipline was needed there; and abroad the nation's troubles called\nthe prophet to an anguish and a toil which left no room for the sweet\nlove or hope of his youth. He steps at once to his hard warfare for\nhis people; and through the rest of his book we never again hear him\nspeak of home, or of children, or of wife. So Arthur passed from\nGuinevere to his last battle for his land:--\n\n \"Lo! I forgive thee, as Eternal God\n Forgives: do thou for thine own soul the rest.\n But how to take last leave of all I loved?\n\n * * * * *\n\n I cannot touch thy lips, they are not mine;...\n I cannot take thy hand; that too is flesh,\n And in the flesh thou hast sinned; and mine own flesh,\n Here looking down on thine polluted, cries\n 'I loathe thee'; yet not less, O Guinevere,\n For I was ever virgin save for thee,\n My love thro' flesh hath wrought into my life\n So far, that my doom is, I love thee still.\n Let no man dream but that I love thee still.\n Perchance, and so thou purify thy soul,\n And so thou lean on our fair father Christ,\n Hereafter in that world where all are pure\n We two may meet before high God, and thou\n Wilt spring to me, and claim me thine, and know\n I am thine husband, not a smaller soul....\n Leave me that,\n I charge thee, my last hope. Now must I hence,\n Thro' the thick night I hear the trumpet blow.\"\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[450] ii. 23, Heb.\n\n[451] ii. 20, Heb.\n\n[452] vi. 3, 4; vii. 8; ix. 10; xiv. 6, 7, 8.\n\n[453] vii. 11, 12; x. 11; xi. 4, etc.\n\n[454] Pregnant construction, _hath committed great harlotry from\nafter Jehovah_.\n\n[455] These personal names do not elsewhere occur. \u05d2\u05b9\u05bc\u05de\u05b6\u05e8; \u0393\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1.\n\u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd; \u0394\u03b5\u03b2\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc B; \u0394\u03b5\u03b2\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc, AQ. They have, of course, been\ninterpreted allegorically in the interests of the theory discussed\nbelow. \u05d2\u05de\u05e8 has been taken to mean \"completion,\" and interpreted as\nvarious derivatives of that root: Jerome, \"the perfect one\"; Raschi,\n\"that fulfilled all evil\"; Kimchi, \"fulfilment of punishment\";\nCalvin, \"consumptio,\" and so on. \u05d3\u05d1\u05dc\u05d9\u05dd has been traced to \u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05dc\u05d4, Pl.\n\u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, cakes of pressed figs, as if a name had been sought to\nconnect the woman at once with the idol-worship and a rich sweetness;\nor to an Arabic root, \u05d3\u05d1\u05dc, to press, as if it referred either to the\nplumpness of the body (cf. Ezek. xvi. 7; so Hitzig) or to the woman's\nhabits. But all these are far-fetched and vain. There is no reason\nto suppose that either of the two names is symbolic. The alternative\n(allowed by the language) naturally suggests itself that \u05d3\u05d1\u05dc\u05d9\u05dd is the\nname of Gomer's birthplace. But there is nothing to prove this. No\nsuch place-name occurs elsewhere: one cannot adduce the Diblathaim in\nMoab (Num. xxxiii. 46 ff.; Jer. xlviii. 2).\n\n[456] _Hist. Geog._, Chap. XVIII.\n\n[457] \u05e8\u05bb\u05d7\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 \u05dc\u05b9\u05d0, probably 3rd pers. sing. fem. Pual (in Pause\ncf. Prov. xxviii. 13); literally, _She is not loved_ or _pitied_.\nThe word means love as pity: \"such pity as a father hath unto his\nchildren dear\" (Psalm ciii.), or God to a penitent man (Psalm\nxxviii. 13). The Greek versions alternate between love and pity.\nLXX. \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f20\u03bb\u03b5\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f20\u03bb\u03b5\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, for which the\nComplutensian has \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, the reading followed by Paul (Rom. ix,\n25: cf. 1 Peter ii. 10).\n\n[458] Here ver. 7 is to be omitted, as explained above, p. 213.\n\n[459] Do not belong to you; but the _I am_, \u05d0\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4, recalls the _I am\nthat I am_ of Exodus.\n\n[460] Augustine, Ambrose, Theodoret, Cyril Alex. and Theodore of\nMopsuestia.\n\n[461] It is interesting to read in parallel the interpretations of\nMatthew Henry and Dr. Pusey. They are very alike, but the latter has\nthe more delicate taste of his age.\n\n[462] i. 2.\n\n[463] The former is Matthew Henry's; the latter seems to be implied\nby Pusey.\n\n[464] Robertson Smith, _Prophets of Israel_.\n\n[465] Apparently it was W. R. Smith's interpretation which caused\nKuenen to give up the allegorical theory.\n\n[466] Two instances are usually quoted. The one is Isaiah vi., where\nmost are agreed that what Isaiah has stated there as his inaugural\nvision is not only what happened in the earliest moments of his\nprophetic life, but this spelt out and emphasised by his experience\nsince. See _Isaiah I.-XXXIX._ (Exp. Bible), pp. 57 f. The other\ninstance is Jeremiah xxxii. 8, where the prophet tells us that he\nbecame convinced that the Lord spoke to him on a certain occasion\nonly after a subsequent event proved this to be the case.\n\n[467] An Eastern woman seldom weans her child before the end of its\nsecond year.\n\n[468] iii. 2.\n\n[469] From a speech by John Bright.\n\n[470] iv. 13, 14.\n\n[471] Cf. the spiritual use of the term, Isa. lxii. 4.\n\n[472] For proof and exposition of all this see Robertson Smith,\n_Religion of the Semites_, 92 ff.\n\n[473] ii. 8.\n\n[474] So best is rendered \u05d7\u05e1\u05d3, \u1e25esedh, which means always not merely\nan affection, \"lovingkindness,\" as our version puts it, but a\nrelation loyally observed.\n\n[475] An expansion of this will be found in the present writer's\n_Isaiah XL.-LXVI._ (Expositor's Bible Series), pp. 398 ff.\n\n[476] ii. 13.\n\n[477] ii. 5, 13.\n\n[478] ii. 5.\n\n[479] See above, p. 235.\n\n[480] The participle Qal, used by God of Himself in His proclamations\nof grace or of punishment, has in this passage (cf. ver. 16) and\nelsewhere (especially in Deuteronomy) the force of an immediate future.\n\n[481] So LXX.; Mass. Text, _thy_.\n\n[482] The reading \u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b5\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4\u05bc is more probable than \u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b5\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4.\n\n[483] Or _they made it into a Ba'al_ image. So Ew., Hitz., Nowack.\nBut Wellhausen omits the clause.\n\n[484] Wellhausen thinks that up to ver. 14 only physical calamities\nare meant, but the \u05d4\u05e6\u05dc\u05ea\u05d5 of ver. 11, as well as others of the terms\nused, imply not the blighting of crops before their season, but the\ncarrying of them away in their season, when they had fully ripened,\nby invaders. The cessation of all worship points to the removal of\nthe people from their land, which is also implied, of course, by the\npromise that they shall be sown again in ver. 23.\n\n[485] Cf. Isa. xl. 1: which to the same exiled Israel is the\nfulfilment of the promise made by Hosea. See _Isaiah XL.-LXVI._\n(Expositor's Bible), pp. 75 ff.\n\n[486] Wellhausen calls ver. 18 a gloss to ver. 19.\n\n[487] Massoretic Text, _her_.\n\n[488] It is at this point, if at any, that i. 10, 11, ii. 1 (Eng.,\nbut ii. 1-3 Heb.) ought to come in. It will be observed, however,\nthat even here they are superfluous: _And the number of the children\nof Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured\nnor counted; and it shall be in the place where it was said to them,\nNo People of Mine are ye! it shall be said to them, Sons of the\nLiving God! And the children of Judah and the children of Israel\nshall be gathered together, and they shall appoint themselves one\nhead, and shall go up from the land: for great is the day of Jezreel.\nSay unto your brothers, My People, and to your sisters_ (LXX.\n_sister_), _She-is-Pitied_. On the whole passage see above, p. 213.\n\n[489] Or _that is loved of her husband though an adulteress_.\n\n[490] So LXX. The homer was eight bushels. The lethech is a measure\nnot elsewhere mentioned.\n\n[491] On these see above, Introduction, Chap. III., p. 38.\n\n[492] On the text see above, p. 214.\n\n[493] xi. 9.\n\n[494] As the stories all written down before this had made familiar\nto Israel.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XV\n\n _THE THICK NIGHT OF ISRAEL_\n\n HOSEA iv.-xiv.\n\n\nIt was indeed \"thick night\" into which this Arthur of Israel stepped\nfrom his shattered home. The mists drive across Hosea's long agony\nwith his people, and what we see, we see blurred and broken. There\nis stumbling and clashing; crowds in drift; confused rallies; gangs\nof assassins breaking across the highways; doors opening upon lurid\ninteriors full of drunken riot. Voices, which other voices mock, cry\nfor a dawn that never comes. God Himself is Laughter, Lightning,\na Lion, a Gnawing Worm. Only one clear note breaks over the\nconfusion--the trumpet summoning to war.\n\nTake courage, O great heart! Not thus shall it always be! There wait\nthee, before the end, of open Visions at least two--one of Memory and\none of Hope, one of Childhood and one of Spring. Past this night,\npast the swamp and jungle of these fetid years, thou shalt see thy\nland in her beauty, and God shall look on the face of His Bride.\n\n * * * * *\n\nChaps, iv.-xiv. are almost indivisible. The two Visions just\nmentioned, chaps. xi. and xiv. 3-9, may be detached by virtue of\ncontributing the only strains of gospel which rise victorious above\nthe Lord's controversy with His people and the troubled story of\ntheir sins. All the rest is the noise of a nation falling to pieces,\nthe crumbling of a splendid past. And as decay has no climax and ruin\nno rhythm, so we may understand why it is impossible to divide with\nany certainty Hosea's record of Israel's fall. Some arrangement we\nmust attempt, but it is more or less artificial, and to be undertaken\nfor the sake of our own minds, that cannot grasp so great a collapse\nall at once. Chap. iv. has a certain unity, and is followed by a new\nexordium, but as it forms only the theme of which the subsequent\nchapters are variations, we may take it with them as far as chap.\nvii., ver. 7; after which there is a slight transition from the\nmoral signs of Israel's dissolution to the political--although Hosea\nstill combines the religious offence of idolatry with the anarchy\nof the land. These form the chief interest to the end of chap. x.\nThen breaks the bright Vision of the Past, chap. xi., the temporary\nvictory of the Gospel of the Prophet over his Curse. In chaps.\nxii.-xiv. 2 we are plunged into the latter once more, and reach in\nxiv. 3 ff. the second bright Vision, the Vision of the Future. To\neach of these phases of Israel's Thick Night--we can hardly call them\nSections--we may devote a chapter of simple exposition, adding three\nchapters more of detailed examination of the main doctrines we shall\nhave encountered on our way--the Knowledge of God, Repentance, and\nthe Sin against Love.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVI\n\n _A PEOPLE IN DECAY: 1. MORALLY_\n\n HOSEA iv.-vii 7.\n\n\nPursuing the plan laid down in the last chapter, we now take the\nsection of Hosea's discourse which lies between chap. iv. 1 and\nchap. vii. 7. Chap. iv. is the only really separable bit of it; but\nthere are also slight breaks at v. 15 and vii. 2. So we may attempt\na division into four periods: 1. Chap. iv., which states God's\ngeneral charge against the people; 2. Chap. v. 1-14, which discusses\nthe priests and princes; 3. Chaps. v. 15-vii. 2, which abjures the\npeople's attempts at repentance; and 4. Chap. vii. 3-7, which is a\nlurid spectacle of the drunken and profligate court. All these give\nsymptoms of the moral decay of the people,--the family destroyed by\nimpurity, and society by theft and murder; the corruption of the\nspiritual guides of the people; the debauchery of the nobles; the\nsympathy of the throne with evil,--with the despairing judgment that\nsuch a people are incapable even of repentance. The keynotes are\nthese: _No troth, leal love, nor knowledge of God in the land. Priest\nand Prophet stumble. Ephraim and Judah stumble. I am as the moth to\nEphraim. What can I make of thee, Ephraim? When I would heal them,\ntheir guilt is only the more exposed._ Morally, Israel is rotten.\nThe prophet, of course, cannot help adding signs of their political\nincoherence. But these he deals with more especially in the part of\nhis discourse which follows chap. vii. 7.\n\n\n 1. THE LORD'S QUARREL WITH ISRAEL.\n\n HOSEA iv.\n\n_Hear the word of Jehovah, sons of Israel!_[495] _Jehovah hath a\nquarrel with the inhabitants of the land, for there is no troth nor\nleal love nor knowledge of God in the land. Perjury_[496] _and murder\nand theft and adultery!_[497] _They break out, and blood strikes upon\nblood._\n\nThat stable and well-furnished life, across which, while it was still\nnoon, Amos hurled his alarms--how quickly it has broken up! If there\nbe still _ease in Zion_, there is no more _security in Samaria_.[498]\nThe great Jeroboam is dead, and society, which in the East depends\nso much on the individual, is loose and falling to pieces. The sins\nwhich are exposed by Amos were those that lurked beneath a still\nstrong government, but Hosea adds outbreaks which set all order at\ndefiance. Later we shall find him describing housebreaking, highway\nrobbery and assassination. _Therefore doth the land wither, and every\none of her denizens languisheth, even to the beast of the field and\nthe fowl of the heaven; yea, even the fish of the sea are swept up_\nin the universal sickness of man and nature: for Hosea feels, like\nAmos, the liability of nature to the curse upon sin.\n\nYet the guilt is not that of the whole people, but of their\nreligious guides. _Let none find fault and none upbraid, for My\npeople are but as their priestlings._[499] _O Priest, thou hast\nstumbled to-day: and stumble to-night shall the prophet with thee._\nOne order of the nation's ministers goes staggering after the other!\n_And I will destroy thy Mother_, presumably the Nation herself.\n_Perished are My people for lack of knowledge._ But how? By the\nsin of their teachers. _Because thou_, O Priest, _hast rejected\nknowledge, I reject thee from being priest to Me; and as thou hast\nforgotten the Torah of thy God, I forget thy children_[500]--_I on\nMy side. As many as they be, so many have sinned against Me._ Every\njack-priest of them is culpable. _They have turned_[501] _their glory\ninto shame. They feed on the sin of My people, and to the guilt of\nthese lift up their appetite!_ The more the people sin, the more\nmerrily thrive the priests by fines and sin-offerings. They live\nupon the vice of the day, and have a vested interest in its crimes.\nEnglish Langland said the same thing of the friars of his time. The\ncontention is obvious. The priests have given themselves wholly to\nthe ritual; they have forgotten that their office is an intellectual\nand moral one. We shall return to this when treating of Hosea's\ndoctrine of knowledge and its responsibilities. Priesthood, let us\nonly remember, priesthood is an intellectual trust.\n\n_Thus it comes to be--like people like priest_: they also have fallen\nunder the ritual, doing from lust what the priests do from greed.\n_But I will visit upon them their ways, and their deeds will I\nrequite to them. For they_--those _shall eat and not be satisfied_,\nthese _shall play the harlot and have no increase, because they have\nleft off heeding Jehovah_. This absorption in ritual at the expense\nof the moral and intellectual elements of religion has insensibly\nled them over into idolatry, with all its unchaste and drunken\nservices. _Harlotry, wine and new wine take away the brains!_[502]\nThe result is seen in the stupidity with which they consult their\nstocks for guidance. _My people! of its bit of wood it asketh\ncounsel, and its staff telleth to it_ the oracle! _For a spirit of\nharlotry hath led them astray, and they have played the harlot from\ntheir God. Upon the headlands of the hills they sacrifice, and on\nthe heights offer incense, under oak or poplar or terebinth, for\nthe shade of them is pleasant._ On _headlands_, not summits, for\nhere no trees grow; and the altar was generally built under a tree\nand near water on some promontory, from which the flight of birds\nor of clouds might be watched. _Wherefore_--because of this your\nfrequenting of the heathen shrines--_your daughters play the harlot\nand your daughters-in-law commit adultery. I will not come with\npunishment upon your daughters because they play the harlot, nor\nupon your daughters-in-law because they commit adultery._ Why? For\n_they themselves_, the fathers of Israel--or does he still mean the\npriests?--_go aside with the harlots and sacrifice with the common\nwomen of the shrines_! It is vain for the men of a nation to practise\nimpurity, and fancy that nevertheless they can keep their womankind\nchaste. _So the stupid people fall to ruin!_\n\n(_Though thou play the harlot, Israel, let not Judah bring guilt on\nherself. And come not to Gilgal, and go not up to Beth-Aven, and take\nnot your oath_ at the Well-of-the-Oath, Beer-Sheba,[503] _By the life\nof Jehovah!_ This obvious parenthesis may be either by Hosea or a\nlater writer; the latter is more probable.[504])\n\n_Yea, like a wild heifer Israel has gone wild. How now can Jehovah\nfeed them like a lamb in a broad meadow?_ To treat this clause\ninterrogatively is the only way to get sense out of it.[505]\n_Wedded to idols is Ephraim: leave him alone._ The participle means\n_mated_ or _leagued_. The corresponding noun is used of a wife as\nthe _mate_ of her husband[506] and of an idolater as the _mate_ of\nhis idols.[507] The expression is doubly appropriate here, since\nHosea used marriage as the figure of the relation of a deity to his\nworshippers. _Leave him alone_--he must go from bad to worse. _Their\ndrunkenness over, they take to harlotry: her rulers have fallen in\nlove with shame, or they love shame more than their pride._[508] But\nin spite of all their servile worship the Assyrian tempest shall\nsweep them away in its trail. _A wind hath wrapt them up in her\nskirts; and they shall be put to shame by their sacrifices._\n\nThis brings the passage to such a climax as Amos loved to crown his\nperiods. And the opening of the next chapter offers a new exordium.\n\n\n 2. PRIESTS AND PRINCES FAIL.\n\n HOSEA v. 1-14.\n\nThe line followed in this paragraph is almost parallel to that of chap.\niv., running out to a prospect of invasion. But the charge is directed\nsolely against the chiefs of the people, and the strictures of chap.\nvii. 7 ff. upon the political folly of the rulers are anticipated.\n\n_Hear this, O Priests, and hearken, House of Israel, and, House\nof the King, give ear. For on you is the sentence!_ You, who have\nhitherto been the judges, this time shall be judged.\n\n_A snare have ye become at Mizpeh, and a net spread out upon Tabor,\nand a pit have they made deep upon Shittim;_[509] _but I shall be\nthe scourge of them all. I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hid from\nMe--for now hast thou played the harlot, Ephraim, Israel is defiled._\nThe worship on the high places, whether nominally of Jehovah or not,\nwas sheer service of Ba'alim. It was in the interest both of the\npriesthood and of the rulers to multiply these sanctuaries, but they\nwere only traps for the people. _Their deeds will not let them return\nto their God; for a harlot spirit is in their midst, and Jehovah_, for\nall their oaths by Him, _they have not known. But the pride of Israel\nshall testify to his face; and Israel and Ephraim shall stumble by\ntheir guilt--stumble also shall Judah with them._ By Israel's pride\nmany understand God. But the term is used too opprobriously by Amos\nto allow us to agree to this. The phrase must mean that Israel's\narrogance, or her proud prosperity, by the wounds which it feels in\nthis time of national decay, shall itself testify against the people--a\nprofound ethical symptom to which we shall return when treating of\nRepentance.[510] Yet the verse may be rendered in harmony with the\ncontext: _the pride of Israel shall be humbled to his face. With their\nsheep and their cattle they go about to seek Jehovah, and shall not\nfind_ Him; _He hath drawn off from them. They have been unfaithful\nto Jehovah, for they have begotten strange children_. A generation\nhas grown up who are not His. _Now may a month devour them with their\nportions!_ Any month may bring the swift invader. Hark! the alarum of\nwar! How it reaches to the back of the land!\n\n _Blow the trumpet in Gibeah, the clarion in Ramah;_\n _Raise the slogan, Beth-Aven: \"After thee, Benjamin!\"_[511]\n\n_Ephraim shall become desolation in the day of rebuke! Among the\ntribes of Israel I have made known what is certain!_\n\nAt this point, ver. 10, the discourse swerves from the religious to\nthe political leaders of Israel; but as the princes were included\nwith the priests in the exordium (ver. 1), we can hardly count this a\nnew oracle.[512]\n\n_The princes of Judah are like landmark-removers_--commonest of\ncheats in Israel--_upon them will I pour out My wrath like water.\nEphraim is oppressed, crushed is_ his _right, for he wilfully\nwent after vanity._[513] _And I am as the moth to Ephraim, and as\nrottenness to the house of Judah._ Both kingdoms have begun to\nfall to pieces, for by this time Uzziah of Judah also is dead, and\nthe weak politicians are in charge whom Isaiah satirised. _And\nEphraim saw his sickness, and Judah his sore; and Ephraim went\nto Asshur and_[514] _sent to King Jareb--King Combative, King\nPick-Quarrel_,[515] a nickname for the Assyrian monarch. The verse\nprobably refers to the tribute which Menahem sent to Assyria in\n738. If so, then Israel has drifted full five years into her \"thick\nnight.\" _But He cannot heal you, nor dry up your sore. For I_,\nMyself, _am like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the\nhouse of Judah. I, I rend and go My way; I carry off and there is\nnone to deliver._ It is the same truth which Isaiah expressed with\neven greater grimness.[516] God Himself is His people's sore; and not\nall their statecraft nor alliances may heal what He inflicts. Priests\nand Princes, then, have alike failed. A greater failure is to follow.\n\n\n 3. REPENTANCE FAILS.\n\n HOSEA v. 15-vii. 2.\n\nSeeing that their leaders are so helpless, and feeling their wounds,\nthe people may themselves turn to God for healing, but that will\nbe with a repentance so shallow as also to be futile. They have no\nconviction of sin, nor appreciation of how deeply their evils have\neaten.\n\nThis too facile repentance is expressed in a prayer which the\nChristian Church has paraphrased into one of its most beautiful\nhymns of conversion. Yet the introduction to this prayer, and its\nown easy assurance of how soon God will heal the wounds He has made,\nas well as the impatience with which God receives it, oblige us to\ntake the prayer in another sense than the hymn which has been derived\nfrom it.[517] It offers but one more symptom of the optimism of this\nlight-hearted people, whom no discipline and no judgment can impress\nwith the reality of their incurable decay. They said of themselves,\n_The bricks are fallen, let us build with stones_,[518] and now they\nsay just as easily and airily of their God, _He hath torn_ only _that\nHe may heal_: we are fallen, but _He will raise us up again in a day\nor two_. At first it is still God who speaks.\n\n_I am going My way, I am returning to My own place,_[519] _until they\nfeel their guilt and seek My face. When trouble comes upon them, they\nwill soon enough seek Me, saying_:[520]--\n\n \"_Come and let us return to Jehovah:_\n _For He hath rent, that He may heal us,_\n _And hath wounded,_[521] _that He may bind us up._\n _He will bring us to life in a couple of days;_\n _On the third day He will raise us up_ again,\n _That we may live in His presence._\n _Let us know, let us follow up_[522] _to know, Jehovah;_\n _As soon as we seek Him, we shall find Him._[523]\n _And He shall come to us like the winter-rain,_\n _Like the spring-rain, pouring on the land!_\"\n\nBut how is this fair prayer received by God? With incredulity, with\nimpatience. _What can I make of thee, Ephraim? what can I make of thee,\nJudah? since your love is like the morning cloud and like the dew so\nearly gone._ Their shallow hearts need deepening. Have they not been\ndeepened enough? _Wherefore I have hewn_ them _by the prophets, I have\nslain them by the words of My mouth, and My judgment goeth forth like\nthe lightning._[524] _For leal love have I desired, and not sacrifice;\nand the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings._\n\nThat the discourse comes back to the ritual is very intelligible.\nFor what could make repentance seem so easy as the belief that\nforgiveness can be won by simply offering sacrifices? Then the\nprophet leaps upon what each new year of that anarchy revealed\nafresh--the profound sinfulness of the people.\n\n_But they in human fashion_[525] _have transgressed the covenant!\nThere_--he will now point out the very spots--_have they\nbetrayed_[526] _Me! Gilead is a city of evildoers: stamped with\nbloody footprints; assassins_[527] _in troops; a gang of priests\nmurder on the way to Shechem. Yea, crime_[528] _have they done. In\nthe house of Israel I have seen horrors: there Ephraim hath played\nthe harlot: Israel is defiled--Judah as well._[529]\n\nTruly the sinfulness of Israel is endless. Every effort to redeem\nthem only discovers more of it. _When I would turn, when I would\nheal Israel, then the guilt of Ephraim displays itself and the evils\nof Samaria_, these namely: _that they work fraud, and the thief\ncometh in_--evidently a technical term for housebreaking[530]--while\n_abroad a crew_ of highwaymen _foray. And they never think in their\nhearts that all their evil is recorded by Me. Now have their deeds\nencompassed them: they are constantly before Me._\n\nEvidently real repentance on the part of such a people is impossible.\nAs Hosea said before, _Their deeds will not let them return._[531]\n\n\n 4. WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES.\n\n HOSEA vii. 3-7.\n\nThere follows now a very difficult passage. The text is corrupt, and\nwe have no means of determining what precise events are intended. The\ndrift of meaning, however, is evident. The disorder and licentiousness\nof the people are favoured in high places; the throne itself is guilty.\n\n_With their evil they make a king glad, and princes with their\nfalsehoods: all of them are adulterers, like an oven heated by the\nbaker,..._[532]\n\n_On the day of our king_--some coronation or king's birthday--_the\nprinces were sick with fever from wine. He stretched forth his hand\nwith loose fellows_,[533] presumably made them his associates.\n_Like an oven have they made_[534] _their hearts with their\nintriguing._[535] _All night their anger sleepeth:_[536] _in the\nmorning it blazes like a flame of fire. All of them glow like an\noven, and devour their rulers: all their kings have fallen, without\none of them calling on Me._\n\nAn obscure passage upon obscure events; yet so lurid with the\npassion of that fevered people in the flagrant years 743-735 that\nwe can make out the kind of crimes described. A king surrounded by\nloose and unscrupulous nobles: adultery, drunkenness, conspiracies,\nassassinations: every man striking for himself; none appealing to God.\n\nFrom the court, then, downwards, by princes, priests and prophets,\nto the common fathers of Israel and their households, immorality\nprevails. There is no redeeming feature, and no hope of better\nthings. For repentance itself the capacity is gone.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIn making so thorough an indictment of the moral condition of Israel,\nit would have been impossible for Hosea not to speak also of the\npolitical stupidity and restlessness which resulted from it. But he\nhas largely reserved these for that part of his discourse which now\nfollows, and which we will take in the next chapter.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[495] \u05db\u05d9 formally introduces the charge.\n\n[496] Lit. _swearing and falsehood_.\n\n[497] Ninth, sixth, eighth and seventh of the Decalogue.\n\n[498] Amos vi. 1.\n\n[499] iv. 4. According to the excellent emendation of Beck (quoted\nby W\u00fcnsche, p. 142), who instead of \u05d5\u05e2\u05de\u05db\u05db\u05de\u05e8\u05d9\u05d1 proposes \u05db\u05db\u05de\u05e8\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d5\u05e2\u05de\u05d9,\nfor the first word of which there is support in the LXX. \u1f41 \u03bb\u03b1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5.\nThe second word, \u05db\u05de\u05e8, is used for priest only in a bad sense by\nHosea himself, x. 5, and in 2 Kings xxiii. 5 of the calf-worship and\nin Zech. i. 4 of the Baal priesthood. As Wellhausen remarks, this\nemendation restores sense to a passage that had none before. \"Ver. 4\ncannot be directed against the people, but must rather furnish the\nconnection for ver. 5, and effect the transference from the reproof\nof the people (vv. 1-3) to the reproof of the priests (5 ff.).\" The\nletters \u05d9\u05db\u05d4\u05df which are left over in ver. 4 by the emendation are then\njustly improved by Wellhausen (following Zunz) into the vocative \u05d4\u05db\u05d4\u05df\nand taken with the following verse.\n\n[500] The application seems to swerve here. _Thy children_ would\nseem to imply that, for this clause at least, the whole people, and\nnot the priests only, were addressed. But Robertson Smith takes _thy\nmother_ as equivalent, not to the nation, but to the priesthood.\n\n[501] A reading current among Jewish writers and adopted by Geiger,\n_Urschrift_, 316.\n\n[502] Heb. _the heart_, which ancient Israel conceived as the seat of\nthe intellect.\n\n[503] Wellhausen thinks this third place-name (cf. Amos v. 5) has\nbeen dropped. It certainly seems to be understood.\n\n[504] But see above, p. 224.\n\n[505] So all critics since Hitzig.\n\n[506] Mal. ii. 4.\n\n[507] Isa. xliv. 11.\n\n[508] The verse is very uncertain. LXX. read a different and a\nfuller text from _Ephraim_ in the previous verse to _harlotry_ in\nthis: \"Ephraim hath set up for himself stumbling-blocks and chosen\nCanaanites.\" In the first of alternate readings of the latter half\nof the verse omit \u05d4\u05d1\u05d5 as probably a repetition of the end of the\npreceding word; the second alternative is adapted from LXX., which\nfor \u05de\u05d2\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05d4 must have read \u05de\u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05e0\u05d4.\n\n[509] So by slightly altering the consonants. But the text is uncertain.\n\n[510] _Note on the Pride of Israel._--\u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05df means _grandeur_, and is\n(1) so used of Jehovah's majesty (Micah v. 3; Isa. ii. 10, 19, 21;\nxxiv. 14), and (2) of the greatness of human powers (Zech. x. 11; Ezek.\nxxxii. 12). In Psalm xlvii. 5 it is parallel to the land of Israel\n(cf. Nahum ii. 3). (3) In a grosser sense the word is used of the rank\nvegetation of Jordan (Eng. wrongly _swelling_) (Jer. xii. 5; Zech. xi.\n3: cf. Job xxxviii. 11). It would appear to be this grosser sense of\n_rankness_, _arrogance_, in which Amos vi. 8 takes it as parallel to\n_the palaces of Israel_ which _Jehovah loathes and will destroy_. In\nAmos viii. 7 the phrase may be used in scorn; yet some take it even\nthere of God Himself (Buhl, last ed. of Gesenius' _Lexicon_).\n\nNow in Hosea it occurs twice in the phrase given above--\u05d5\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 \u05d1\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5\n\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc \u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05df (v. 5, vii. 10). LXX., Targum and some Jewish exegetes\ntake \u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 as a \u05dc\u05f4\u05d5 verb, _to be humbled_, and this suits both\ncontexts. But the word \u05d1\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5 _to his face_ almost compels us to take\n\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 as a \u05dc\u05f4\u05d9 verb, _to witness against_ (cf. Job xvi. 8; Jer. xiv.\n7). Hence Wellhausen renders \"With his arrogance Israel witnesseth\nagainst himself,\" and confirms the plaint of Jehovah--the arrogance\nbeing the trust in the ritual and the feeling of no need to turn from\nthat and repent (cf. vii. 10). Orelli quotes Amos vi. 8 and Nahum\nii. 3, and says injustice cleaves to all Israel's splendour, so it\ntestifies against him.\n\nBut the context, which in both cases speaks of Israel's gradual\ndecay, demands rather the interpretation that Israel's material\ngrandeur shows unmistakable signs of breaking down. For the ethical\ndevelopment of this interpretation, see below, pp. 337 f.\n\n[511] Probably the ancient war-cry of the clan. Cf. Judg. v. 14.\n\n[512] Yet ver. 9 goes with ver. 8 (so Wellhausen), and not with ver.\n10 (so Ewald).\n\n[513] For \u05e6\u05d5 read \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05d0.\n\n[514] Wellhausen inserts _Judah_, with that desire to complete a\nparallel which seems to me to be overdone by so many critics. If\nJudah be inserted we should need to bring the date of these verses\ndown to the reign of Ahaz in 734.\n\n[515] Guthe: \"King Fighting-Cock.\"\n\n[516] See _Isaiah I.-XXXIX._ (Expositor's Bible), pp. 242 ff.\n\n[517] Cheyne indeed (Introduction to Robertson Smith's _Prophets\nof Israel_) takes the prayer to be genuine, but an intrusion. His\nreasons do not persuade me. But at least it is clear that there is a\nwant of connection between the prayer and what follows it, unless the\nprayer be understood in the sense explained above.\n\n[518] Isaiah ix. 10.\n\n[519] Cf. Isaiah xviii. 4.\n\n[520] _Saying_: so the LXX. adds and thereby connects chap. v. with\nchap. vi.\n\n[521] Read \u05d5\u05d9\u05b4\u05da\u05b0.\n\n[522] Literally _hunt_, _pursue_. It is the same word as is used of\nthe unfaithful Israel's pursuit of the Ba'alim, chap. ii. 9.\n\n[523] So by a rearrangement of consonants (\u05e0\u05de\u05e6\u05d0\u05d4\u05d5 \u05db\u05e9\u05d7\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5) and the\nhelp of the LXX. (\u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd) Giesebrecht (_Beitr\u00e4ge_, p. 208)\nproposes to read the clause, which in the traditional text runs,\n_like the morn His going forth shall be certain_.\n\n[524] Read \u05d9\u05b5\u05e6\u05b5\u05d0 \u05db\u05b8\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8 \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d8\u05b4\u05d9.\n\n[525] Or _like Adam_, or (Guthe) _like the heathen_.\n\n[526] The verb means to prove false to any contract, but especially\nmarriage.\n\n[527] Read \u05de\u05d7\u05db\u05d9.\n\n[528] In several passages of the Old Testament the word means\nunchastity.\n\n[529] Here the LXX. close chap. vi., taking 11 _b_ along with chap.\nvii. Some think the whole of ver. 11 to be a Jud\u00e6an gloss.\n\n[530] Cf. Joel ii. 9, and the New Testament phrase _to come as a\nthief_.\n\n[531] v. 4.\n\n[532] The text is unsound. Heb.: \"like an oven kindled by the\nbaker, the stirrer (stoker or kneader?) resteth from kneading the\ndough until it be leavened.\" LXX.: \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03b2\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c8\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f11\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc--_i.e._ for \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05ea they read \u05dc\u05d7\u05d1\u05ea \u05d0\u05e9. Oort emends Heb. to \u05d0\u05e4\u05d4\u05d5\n\u05d4\u05dd \u05d1\u05d5\u05e2\u05e8, which gets rid of the difficulty of a feminine participle\nwith \u05ea\u05e0\u05d5\u05e8. Wellhausen omits whole clause as a gloss on ver. 6. But if\nthere be a gloss it properly commences with \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05ea.\n\n[533] LXX. \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd??\n\n[534] LXX. _kindled_, \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e2\u05b0\u05e8\u05b7\u05d5\u05bc. So Vollers, _Z.A.T.W._, III. 250.\n\n[535] Lit. _lurking_.\n\n[536] Massoretic Text with different vowels reads _their baker_. LXX.\n\u0395\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc!\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVII\n\n _A PEOPLE IN DECAY: II. POLITICALLY_\n\n HOSEA vii. 8-x.\n\n\nMoral decay means political decay. Sins like these are the gangrene\nof nations. It is part of Hosea's greatness to have traced this,\na proof of that versatility which distinguishes him above other\nprophets. The most spiritual of them all, he is at the same time the\nmost political. We owe him an analysis of repentance to which the New\nTestament has little to add;[537] but he has also left us a criticism\nof society and of politics in Israel, unrivalled except by Isaiah. We\nowe him an intellectual conception of God,[538] which for the first\ntime in Israel exploded idolatry; yet he also is the first to define\nIsrael's position in the politics of Western Asia. With the simple\ncourage of conscience Amos had said to the people: You are bad,\ntherefore you must perish. But Hosea's is the insight to follow the\nprocesses by which sin brings forth death--to trace, for instance,\nthe effects of impurity upon a nation's powers of reproduction, as\nwell as upon its intellectual vigour.\n\nSo intimate are these two faculties of Hosea, that in chapters\ndevoted chiefly to the sins of Israel we have already seen him\nexpose the political disasters that follow. But from the point we\nhave now reached--chap. vii. 8--the proportion of his prophesying is\nreversed: he gives us less of the sin and more of the social decay\nand political folly of his age.\n\n\n I. THE CONFUSION OF THE NATION.\n\n HOSEA vii. 8-viii. 3.\n\nHosea begins by summing up the public aspect of Israel in two\nepigrams, short but of marvellous adequacy (vii. 8):--\n\n _Ephraim--among the nations he mixeth himself:_\n _Ephraim has become a cake not turned._\n\nIt is a great crisis for any nation to pass from the seclusion of\nits youth and become a factor in the main history of the world. But\nfor Israel the crisis was trebly great. Their difference from all\nother tribes about them had struck the Canaanites on their first\nentry to the land:[539] their own earliest writers had emphasised\ntheir seclusion as their strength;[540] and their first prophets\nconsistently deprecated every overture made by them either to Egypt\nor to Assyria. We feel the force of the prophets' policy when we\nremember what happened to the Philistines. These were a people as\nstrong and as distinctive as Israel, with whom at one time they\ndisputed possession of the whole land. But their position as traders\nin the main line of traffic between Asia and Africa rendered the\nPhilistines peculiarly open to foreign influence. They were now\nEgyptian vassals, now Assyrian victims; and after the invasion of\nAlexander the Great their cities became centres of Hellenism, while\nthe Jews upon their secluded hills still stubbornly held unmixed\ntheir race and their religion. This contrast, so remarkably developed\nin later centuries, has justified the prophets of the eighth in\ntheir anxiety that Israel should not annul the advantages of her\ngeographical seclusion by trade or treaties with the Gentiles. But it\nwas easier for Jud\u00e6a to take heed to the warning than for Ephraim.\nThe latter lies as open and fertile as her sister-province is barren\nand aloof. She has many gates into the world, and they open upon many\nmarkets. Nobler opportunities there could not be for a nation in the\nmaturity of its genius and loyal to its vocation:--\n\n _Rejoice, O Zebulun, in thine outgoings:_\n _They shall call the nations to the mountain;_\n _They shall suck of the abundance of the seas,_\n _And of the treasure that is stored in the sands._[541]\n\nBut in the time of his outgoings Ephraim was not sure of himself\nnor true to his God, the one secret and strength of the national\ndistinctiveness. So he met the world weak and unformed, and, instead\nof impressing it, was by it dissipated and confused. The tides of a\nlavish commerce scattered abroad the faculties of the people, and\nswept back upon their life alien fashions and tempers, to subdue\nwhich there was neither native strength nor definiteness of national\npurpose. All this is what Hosea means by the first of his epigrams:\n_Ephraim--among the nations he lets himself be poured out_, or\n_mixed up_. The form of the verb does not elsewhere occur; but it\nis reflexive, and the meaning of the root is certain. _Balal_ is to\n_pour out_, or _mingle_, as of oil in the sacrificial flour. Yet\nit is sometimes used of a mixing which is not sacred, but profane\nand hopeless. It is applied to the first great confusion of mankind,\nto which a popular etymology has traced the name Babel, as if for\nBalbel. Derivatives of the stem bear the additional ideas of staining\nand impurity. The alternative renderings which have been proposed,\n_lets himself be soaked_ and _scatters himself_ abroad like wheat\namong tares, are not so probable, yet hardly change the meaning.[542]\nEphraim wastes and confuses himself among the Gentiles. The nation's\ncharacter is so disguised that Hosea afterwards nicknames him\nCanaan;[543] their religion so filled with foreign influences that he\ncalls the people the harlot of the Ba'alim.\n\nIf the first of Hosea's epigrams satirises Israel's foreign\nrelations, the second, with equal brevity and wit, hits off the\ntemper and constitution of society at home. For the metaphor of which\nthis epigram is composed Hosea has gone to the baker. Among all\nclasses in the East, especially under conditions requiring haste,\nthere is in demand a round flat scone, which is baked by being laid\non hot stones or attached to the wall of a heated oven. The whole art\nof baking consists in turning the scone over at the proper moment. If\nthis be mismanaged, it does not need a baker to tell us that one side\nmay be burnt to a cinder, while the other remains raw. _Ephraim_,\nsays Hosea, _is an unturned cake._\n\nBy this he may mean one of several things, or all of them together,\nfor they are infectious of each other. There was, for instance, the\nsocial condition of the people. What can better be described as an\nunturned scone than a community one half of whose number are too\nrich, and the other too poor? Or Hosea may refer to that unequal\ndistribution of religion through life with which in other parts of\nhis prophecy he reproaches Israel. They keep their religion, as\nAmos more fully tells us, for their temples, and neglect to carry\nits spirit into their daily business. Or he may refer to Israel's\npolitics, which were equally in want of thoroughness. They rushed\nhotly at an enterprise, but having expended so much fire in the\nbeginning of it, they let the end drop cold and dead. Or he may wish\nto satirise, like Amos, Israel's imperfect culture--the pretentious\nand overdone arts, stuck excrescence-wise upon the unrefined bulk\nof the nation, just as in many German principalities last century\nsociety took on a few French fashions in rough and exaggerated forms,\nwhile at heart still brutal and coarse. Hosea may mean any one of\nthese things, for the figure suits all, and all spring from the\nsame defect. Want of thoroughness and equable effort was Israel's\nbesetting sin, and it told on all sides of his life. How better\ndescribe a half-fed people, a half-cultured society, a half-lived\nreligion, a half-hearted policy, than by a half-baked scone?\n\nWe who are so proud of our political bakers, we who scorn the rapid\nrevolutions of our neighbours and complacently dwell upon our equable\novens, those slow and cautious centuries of political development\nwhich lie behind us--have we anything better than our neighbours,\nanything better than Israel, to show in our civilisation? Hosea's\nepigram fits us to the letter. After all those ages of baking,\nsociety is still with us _an unturned scone_: one end of the nation\nwith the strength burnt out of it by too much enjoyment of life, the\nother with not enough of warmth to be quickened into anything like\nadequate vitality. No man can deny that this is so; we are able to\nlive only by shutting our hearts to the fact. Or is religion equably\ndistributed through the lives of the religious portion of our nation?\nOf late years religion has spread, and spread wonderfully, but of how\nmany Christians is it still true that they are but half-baked--living\na life one side of which is reeking with the smoke of sacrifice,\nwhile the other is never warmed by one religious thought. We may\nhave too much religion if we confine it to one day or one department\nof life: our worship overdone, with the sap and the freshness burnt\nout of it, cindery, dusty, unattractive, fit only for crumbling; our\nconduct cold, damp and heavy, like dough the fire has never reached.\n\nUpon the theme of these two epigrams the other verses of this\nchapter are variations. Has Ephraim mixed himself among the peoples?\n_Strangers have devoured his strength, and he knoweth it not_,\nsenselessly congratulating himself upon the increase of his trade and\nwealth, while he does not feel that these have sucked from him all\nhis distinctive virtue. _Yea, grey hairs are sprinkled upon him, and\nhe knoweth it not._ He makes his energy the measure of his life, as\nIsaiah also marked,[544] but sees not that it all means waste and\ndecay. _The pride of Israel testifieth to his face, yet_--even when\nthe pride of the nation is touched to the quick by such humiliating\novertures as they make to both Assyria and Egypt[545]--_they do not\nreturn to Jehovah their God, nor seek Him for all this_.\n\nWith virtue and single-hearted faith have disappeared intellect and\nthe capacity for affairs. _Ephraim is become like a silly dove--a dove\nwithout heart_, to the Hebrews the organ of the wits of a man--_they\ncry to Egypt, they go off to Assyria_. Poor pigeon of a people,\nfluttering from one refuge to another! But _as they go I will throw\nover them My net, like a bird of the air I will bring them down. I\nwill punish them as their congregation have heard_--this text as it\nstands[546] can only mean \"in the manner I have publicly proclaimed in\nIsrael.\" _Woe to them that they have strayed from Me! Damnation to them\nthat they have rebelled against Me! While I would have redeemed them,\nthey spoke lies about Me. And they have never cried unto Me with their\nheart, but they keep howling on their beds for corn and new wine._ No\nreal repentance theirs, but some fear of drought and miscarriage of\nthe harvests, a sensual and servile sorrow in which they wallow. They\nseek God with no heart, no true appreciation of what He is, but use\nthe senseless means by which the heathen invoke their gods: _they cut\nthemselves,_[547] _and_ so _apostatise from Me! And yet it was I who\ndisciplined them, I strengthened their arm, but with regard to Me they\nkept thinking_ only _evil!_ So fickle and sensitive to fear, _they\nturn_ indeed, _but not upwards_; no Godward conversion theirs. In their\nrepentance _they are like a bow which swerves_--off upon some impulse\nof their ill-balanced natures. _Their princes must fall by the sword\nbecause of the bitterness_--we should have expected \"falseness\"--_of\ntheir tongue: this is their scorn in the land of Egypt!_ To the\nallusion we have no key.\n\nWith so false a people nothing can be done. Their doom is inevitable. So\n\n \"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.\"\n\n_To thy mouth with the trumpet! The Eagle is down upon the house of\nJehovah!_[548] Where the carcase is, there are the eagles gathered\ntogether. _For_--to sum up the whole crisis--_they have transgressed\nMy covenant, and against My law have they rebelled. To Me they cry,\nMy God, we know Thee, we Israel!_ What does it matter? _Israel hath\nspurned the good:_[549] _the Foe must pursue him._\n\nIt is the same climax of inevitable war to which Amos led up his\nperiods; and a new subject is now introduced.\n\n\n 2. ARTIFICIAL KINGS AND ARTIFICIAL GODS.\n\n HOSEA viii. 4-13.\n\nThe curse of such a state of dissipation as that to which Israel had\nfallen is that it produces no men. Had the people had in them \"the\nroot of the matter,\" had there been the stalk and the fibre of a\nnational consciousness and purpose, it would have blossomed to a man.\nIn the similar time of her outgoings upon the world Prussia had her\nFrederick the Great, and Israel, too, would have produced a leader, a\nheaven-sent king, if the national spirit had not been squandered on\nforeign trade and fashions. But after the death of Jeroboam every man\nwho rose to eminence in Israel, rose, not on the nation, but only on\nthe fevered and transient impulse of some faction; and through the\nbroken years one party monarch was lifted after another to the brief\ntenancy of a blood-stained throne. They were not from God, these\nmonarchs; but man-made, and sooner or later man-murdered. With his\nsharp insight Hosea likens these artificial kings to the artificial\ngods, also the work of men's hands; and till near the close of his\nbook the idols of the sanctuary and the puppets of the throne form\nthe twin targets of his scorn.\n\n_They have made kings, but not from Me; they have made princes, but\nI knew not. With their silver and their gold they have manufactured\nthemselves idols, only that they_[550] _may be cut off_--king after\nking, idol upon idol. _He loathes thy Calf, O Samaria_, the thing\nof wood and gold which thou callest Jehovah. And God confirms this.\n_Kindled is Mine anger against them! How long will they be incapable of\ninnocence?_--unable to clear themselves of guilt! The idol is still in\nhis mind. _For from Israel is it also_--as much as the puppet-kings;\n_a workman made it, and no god is it. Yea, splinters shall the Calf of\nSamaria become._[551] Splinters shall everything in Israel become.\n_For they sow the wind, and the whirlwind shall they reap._ Indeed like\na storm Hosea's own language now sweeps along; and his metaphors are\ntorn into shreds upon it. _Stalk it hath none: the sprout brings forth\nno grain: if it were to bring forth, strangers would swallow it._[552]\nNay, _Israel hath let herself be swallowed up! Already are they become\namong the nations like a vessel there is no more use for._ Heathen\nempires have sucked them dry. _They have gone up to Assyria like a\nrunaway wild-ass. Ephraim hath hired lovers._[553] It is again the\nnote of their mad dissipation among the foreigners. _But if they_ thus\n_give themselves away among the nations, I must gather them in, and_\nthen _shall they have to cease a little from the anointing of a king\nand princes_.[554] This wilful roaming of theirs among the foreigners\nshall be followed by compulsory exile, and all their unholy artificial\npolitics shall cease. The discourse turns to the other target. _For\nEphraim hath multiplied altars--to sin; altars are his own--to sin.\nWere I to write for him by myriads My laws,_[555] _as those of a\nstranger would they be accounted. They slay burnt-offerings for Me and\neat flesh._[556] _Jehovah hath no delight in them. Now must He remember\ntheir guilt and make visitation upon their sin. They--to Egypt--shall\nreturn_....[557] Back to their ancient servitude must they go, as\nformerly He said He would withdraw them to the wilderness.[558]\n\n\n 3. THE EFFECTS OF EXILE.\n\n HOSEA ix. 1-9.\n\nHosea now turns to describe the effects of exile upon the social and\nreligious habits of the people. It must break up at once the joy\nand the sacredness of their lives. Every pleasure will be removed,\nevery taste offended. Indeed, even now, with their conscience of\nhaving deserted Jehovah, they cannot pretend to enjoy the feasts of\nthe Ba'alim in the same hearty way as the heathen with whom they\nmix. But, whether or no, the time is near when nature-feasts and all\nother religious ceremonies--all that makes life glad and regular and\nsolemn--shall be impossible.\n\n_Rejoice not, O Israel, to_ the pitch of _rapture like the heathen,\nfor thou hast played the harlot from thy God; a harlot's hire hast\nthou loved on all threshing-floors._[559] _Threshing-floor and\nwine-vat shall ignore_[560] _them, and the new wine shall play them\nfalse. They shall not abide in the land of Jehovah, but Ephraim shall\nreturn to Egypt, and in Assyria they shall eat what is unclean. They\nshall not pour libations to Jehovah, nor prepare_[561] _for Him\ntheir sacrifices. Like the bread of sorrows shall their bread_[562]\n_be; all that eat of it shall be defiled:_ yea, _their bread shall\nbe_ only _for their appetite; they shall not bring it_[563] _to the\ntemple of Jehovah._ He cannot be worshipped off His own land. They\nwill have to live like animals, divorced from religion, unable to\nhold communion with their God. _What shall ye do for days_[564] _of\nfestival, or for a day of pilgrimage to Jehovah? For lo,_ they _shall\nbe gone forth from destruction_,[565] the shock and invasion of\ntheir land, only _that Egypt may gather them in, Memphis give them\nsepulture, nettles inherit their jewels of silver, thorns_ come up\n_in their tents_. The threat of exile still wavers between Assyria\nand Egypt. And in Egypt Memphis is chosen as the destined grave of\nIsrael; for even then her Pyramids and mausoleums were ancient and\nrenowned, her vaults and sepulchres were countless and spacious.\n\nBut what need is there to seek the future for Israel's doom, when\nalready this is being fulfilled by the corruption of her spiritual\nleaders?\n\n_The days of visitation have come, have come the days of requital.\nIsrael already experiences_[566] _them! A fool is the prophet, raving\nmad the man of the spirit._ The old ecstasy of Saul's day has become\ndelirium and fanaticism.[567] Why? _For the mass of thy guilt and\nthe multiplied treachery! Ephraim acts the spy with my God._ There\nis probably a play on the name, for with the meaning a _watchman_\nfor God it is elsewhere used as an honourable title of the prophets.\n_The prophet is a fowler's snare upon all his ways. Treachery--they\nhave made it profound in the very house of their God._[568] _They\nhave done corruptly, as in the days of Gibeah. Their iniquity is\nremembered; visitation is made on their sin._\n\n * * * * *\n\nThese then were the symptoms of the profound political decay which\nfollowed on Israel's immorality. The national spirit and unity of the\npeople had disappeared. Society--half of it was raw, half of it was\nbaked to a cinder. The nation, broken into factions, produced no man\nto lead, no king with the stamp of God upon him. Anarchy prevailed;\nmonarchs were made and murdered. There was no prestige abroad,\nnothing but contempt among the Gentiles for a people whom they had\nexhausted. Judgment was inevitable by exile--nay, it had come already\nin the corruption of the spiritual leaders of the nation.\n\nHosea now turns to probe a deeper corruption still.\n\n\n 4. \"THE CORRUPTION THAT IS THROUGH LUST.\"\n\n HOSEA ix. 10-17: cf. iv. 11-14.\n\nThose who at the present time are enforcing among us the revival of a\nPaganism--without the Pagan conscience--and exalting licentiousness\nto the level of an art, forget how frequently the human race has\nattempted their experiment, with far more sincerity than they\nthemselves can put into it, and how invariably the result has been\nrecorded by history to be weariness, decay and death. On this\noccasion we have the story told to us by one who to the experience of\nthe statesman adds the vision of the poet.\n\nThe generation to which Hosea belonged practised a periodical\nunchastity under the alleged sanctions of nature and religion. And,\nalthough their prophet told them that--like our own apostates from\nChristianity--they could never do so with the abandon of the Pagans,\nfor they carried within them the conscience and the memory of a higher\nfaith, it appears that even the fathers of Israel resorted openly\nand without shame to the licentious rites of the sanctuaries. In an\nearlier passage of his book Hosea insists that all this must impair\nthe people's intellect. _Harlotry takes away the brains._[569] He has\nshown also how it confuses the family, and has exposed the old delusion\nthat men may be impure and keep their womankind chaste.[570] But now he\ndiagnoses another of the inevitable results of this sin. After tracing\nthe sin, and the theory of life which permitted it, to their historical\nbeginnings at the entry of the people into Canaan, he describes how\nthe long practice of it, no matter how pretentious its sanctions,\ninevitably leads not only to exterminating strifes, but to the decay of\nthe vigour of the nation, to barrenness and a diminishing population.\n\n_Like grapes in the wilderness I found Israel, like the first fruit\non a fig-tree in her first season I saw your fathers._ So had the\nlusty nation appeared to God in its youth; in that dry wilderness all\nthe sap and promise of spring were in its eyes, because it was still\npure. But _they--they came to Ba'al-Peor_--the first of the shrines\nof Canaan which they touched--_and dedicated themselves to the Shame,\nand became as abominable as the object of their love_. _Ephraim_--the\n_Fruitful_ name is emphasised--_their glory is flown away like a\nbird. No more birth, no more motherhood, no more conception!_[571]\n_Blasted is Ephraim, withered the root of them, fruit they produce\nnot: yea, even when they beget children I slay the darlings of their\nwomb. Yea, though they bring up their sons I bereave them_, till\nthey are _poor in men. Yea, woe upon themselves also, when I look\naway from them! Ephraim_--again the _Fruitful_ name is dragged to\nthe front--_for prey, as I have seen, are his sons destined._[572]\n_Ephraim_--he _must lead his sons to the slaughter_.\n\nAnd the prophet interrupts with his chorus: _Give them, O LORD--what\nwilt Thou give them? Give them a miscarrying womb and breasts that\nare dry!_\n\n_All their mischief is in Gilgal_--again the Divine voice strikes the\nconnection between the national worship and the national sin--_yea,\nthere do I hate them: for the evil of their doings from My house I will\ndrive them. I will love them no more: all their nobles are rebels._[573]\n\nAnd again the prophet responds: _My God will cast them away, for they\nhave not hearkened to Him, and they shall be vagabonds among the\nnations_.\n\nSome of the warnings which Hosea enforces with regard to this sin\nhave been instinctively felt by mankind since the beginnings of\ncivilisation, and are found expressed among the proverbs of nearly\nall the languages.[574] But I am unaware of any earlier moralist\nin any literature who traced the effects of national licentiousness\nin a diminishing population, or who exposed the persistent delusion\nof libertine men that they themselves may resort to vice, yet keep\ntheir womankind chaste. Hosea, so far as we know, was the first\nto do this. History in many periods has confirmed the justice of\nhis observations, and by one strong voice after another enforced\nhis terrible warnings. The experience of ancient Persia and Egypt;\nthe languor of the Greek cities; the \"deep weariness and sated\nlust\" which in Imperial Rome \"made human life a hell\"; the decay\nwhich overtook Italy after the renascence of Paganism without the\nPagan virtues; the strife and anarchy that have rent every court\nwhere, as in the case of Henri Quatre, the king set the example of\nlibertinage; the incompetence, the poltroonery, the treachery, that\nhave corrupted every camp where, as in French Metz in 1870, soldiers\nand officers gave way so openly to vice; the checks suffered by\nmodern civilisation in face of barbarism because its pioneers mingled\nin vice with the savage races they were subduing; the number of great\nstatesmen falling by their passion, and in their fall frustrating\nthe hopes of nations; the great families worn out by indulgence;\nthe homes broken up by infidelities; the tainting of the blood of a\nnew generation by the poisonous practices of the old,--have not all\nthese things been in every age, and do they not still happen near\nenough to ourselves to give us a great fear of the sin which causes\nthem all? Alas! how slow men are to listen and to lay to heart! Is\nit possible that we can gild by the names of frivolity and piquancy\nhabits the wages of which are death? Is it possible that we can enjoy\ncomedies which make such things their jest? We have among us many\nwho find their business in the theatre, or in some of the periodical\nliterature of our time, in writing and speaking and exhibiting as\nclosely as they dare to limits of public decency. When will they\nlearn that it is not upon the easy edge of mere conventions that\nthey are capering, but upon the brink of those eternal laws whose\nfurther side is death and hell--that it is not the tolerance of their\nfellow-men they are testing, but the patience of God Himself? As for\nthose loud few who claim licence in the name of art and literature,\nlet us not shrink from them as if they were strong or their high\nwords true. They are not strong, they are only reckless; their claims\nare lies. All history, the poets and the prophets, whether Christian\nor Pagan, are against them. They are traitors alike to art, to love,\nand to every other high interest of mankind.\n\nIt may be said that a large part of the art of the day, which takes\ngreat licence in dealing with these subjects, is exercised only\nby the ambition to expose that ruin and decay which Hosea himself\naffirms. This is true. Some of the ablest and most popular writers\nof our time have pictured the facts, which Hosea describes, with\nso vivid a realism that we cannot but judge them to be inspired to\nconfirm his ancient warnings, and to excite a disgust of vice in a\ngeneration which otherwise treats vice so lightly. But if so, their\nministry is exceeding narrow, and it is by their side that we best\nestimate the greatness of the ancient prophet. Their transcript of\nhuman life may be true to the facts it selects, but we find in it\nno trace of facts which are greater and more essential to humanity.\nThey have nothing to tell us of forgiveness and repentance, and yet\nthese are as real as the things they describe. Their pessimism is\nunrelieved. They see the _corruption that is in the world through\nlust_; they forget that there is an _escape_ from it.[575] It is\nHosea's greatness that, while he felt the vices of his day with all\nneeded thoroughness and realism, he yet never allowed them to be\ninevitable or ultimate, but preached repentance and pardon, with the\npossibility of holiness even for his depraved generation. It is the\nlittleness of the Art of our day that these great facts are forgotten\nby her, though once she was their interpreter to men. When she\nremembers them the greatness of her past will return.\n\n\n 5. ONCE MORE: PUPPET-KINGS AND PUPPET-GODS.\n\n HOSEA x.\n\nFor another section, the tenth chapter, the prophet returns to the\ntwin targets of his scorn: the idols and the puppet-kings. But few\nnotes are needed. Observe the reiterated connection between the\nfertility of the land and the idolatry of the people.\n\n_A wanton vine is Israel; he lavishes his fruit:_[576] _the more his\nfruit, the more he made his altars; the goodlier his land, the more\ngoodly he made his_ ma\u00e7\u00e7eboth, or _sacred pillars. False is the heart\nof them: now must they atone for it. He shall break the neck of their\naltars; He shall ruin their pillars. For already they are saying,\nNo king have we, for we have not feared Jehovah, and the king--what\ncould he do for us? Speaking_[577] _of words, swearing of false\noaths, making of bargains--till law_[578] _breaks out like weeds in\nthe furrows of the field._\n\n_For the Calf of Beth-Aven the inhabitants_[579] _of Samaria shall\nbe anxious: yea, mourn for him shall his people, and his priestlings\nshall writhe for him--for his glory that it is banished from him._ In\nthese days of heavy tribute shall the gold of the golden calf be safe?\n_Yea, himself shall they pack_[580] _to Assyria; he shall be offered\nas tribute to King Pick-Quarrel._[581] _Ephraim shall take disgrace,\nand Israel be ashamed because of his counsel._[582] _Undone Samaria!\nHer king like a chip_[583] _on the face of the waters!_ This may refer\nto one of the revolutions in which the king was murdered. But it seems\nmore appropriate to the final catastrophe of 724-1: the fall of the\nkingdom, and the king's banishment to Assyria. If the latter, the verse\nhas been inserted; but the following verse would lead us to take these\ndisasters as still future. _And the high places of idolatry shall be\ndestroyed, the sin of Israel; thorn and thistle shall come up on their\naltars. And they shall say to the mountains, Cover us, and to the\nhills, Fall on us._ It cannot be too often repeated: these handmade\ngods, these chips of kings, shall be swept away together.\n\nOnce more the prophet returns to the ancient origins of Israel's\npresent sins, and once more to their shirking of the discipline\nnecessary for spiritual results, but only that he may lead up as\nbefore to the inevitable doom. _From_[584] _the days of Gibeah thou\nhast sinned, O Israel. There have they remained_--never progressed\nbeyond their position there--_and this without war overtaking them\nin Gibeah against the dastards_.[585] _As soon as I please, I\ncan chastise them, and peoples shall be gathered against them in\nchastisement for their double sin._ This can scarcely be, as some\nsuggest, the two calves at Bethel and Dan. More probably it is still\nthe idols and the man-made kings. Now he returns to the ambition of\nthe people for spiritual results without a spiritual discipline.\n\n_And Ephraim is a broken-in heifer, that loveth to thresh._[586] _But\nI have come on her fair neck. I will yoke Ephraim; Judah must plough;\nJacob must harrow for himself._ It is all very well for the unmuzzled\nbeast[587] to love the threshing, but harder and unrewarded labours of\nploughing and harrowing have to come before the floor be heaped with\nsheaves. Israel must not expect religious festival without religious\ndiscipline. _Sow for yourselves righteousness; then shall ye reap the\nfruit of God's leal love._[588] _Break up your fallow ground, for it\nis time to seek Jehovah, till He come and shower salvation_[589] _upon\nyou._[590] _Ye have ploughed wickedness; disaster have ye reaped:\nye have eaten the fruit of falsehood; for thou didst trust in thy\nchariots,_[591] _in the multitude of thy warriors. For the tumult_ of\nwar _shall arise among thy tribes,_[592] _and all thy fenced cities\nshall be ruined, as Salman beat to ruin Beth-Arbel_[593] _in the day of\nwar: the mother shall be broken on the children_--presumably the land\nshall fall with the falling of her cities. _Thus shall I do to you, O\nhouse of Israel,_[594] _because of the evil of your evil: soon shall\nthe king of Israel be undone--undone._\n\nThe political decay of Israel, then, so deeply figured in all these\nchapters, must end in utter collapse. Let us sum up the gradual\nfeatures of this decay: the substance of the people scattered abroad;\nthe national spirit dissipated; the national prestige humbled; the\nkings mere puppets; the prophets corrupted; the national vigour\nsapped by impurity; the idolatry conscious of its impotence.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[537] See below, Chap. XXII.\n\n[538] See Chap. XXI.\n\n[539] Numb. xxiii. 9 _b_; Josh. ii. 8.\n\n[540] Deut. xxxiii. 27.\n\n[541] Deut. xxxiii. 18, 19.\n\n[542] \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d1\u05b9\u05bc\u05dc\u05b5\u05dc from \u05d1\u05dc\u05dc. In Ph\u0153n. \u05d1\u05dc\u05dc seems to have been used\nas in Israel of the sacrificial mingling of oil and flour (cf.\nRobertson Smith, _Religion of Semites_, I. 203); in Arabic _ball_\nis to weaken a strong liquid with water, while _balbal_ is to be\nconfused, disordered. The Syriac _balal_ is to mix. Some have taken\nHosea's \u05d9\u05ea\u05d1\u05dc\u05dc as if from \u05d1\u05dc\u05d9\u05dc (Isa. xxx. 24; Job vi. 5), usually\nunderstood as a mixed crop of wheat and inferior vegetables for\nfodder; but there is reason to believe \u05d1\u05dc\u05d9\u05dc means rather fresh corn.\nThe derivation from \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4 to grow old, does not seem probable.\n\n[543] xii. 8.\n\n[544] ix. 9 f.\n\n[545] See above, p. 261, and below, p. 337.\n\n[546] But the reading is very doubtful.\n\n[547] For \u05d9\u05ea\u05d2\u05e8\u05e8\u05d5 read \u05d9\u05ea\u05d2\u05d3\u05d3\u05d5.\n\n[548] Wellhausen's objection to the first clause, that one does not set\na trumpet to one's _gums_, which \u05d7\u05b5\u05da\u05b0 literally means, is beside the\nmark. \u05d7\u05b5\u05da\u05b0 is more than once used of the mouth as a whole (Job viii.\n7; Prov. v. 3). The second clause gives the reason of the trumpet, the\nalarum trumpet, in the first. Read \u05e0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05db\u05d9 (so also Wellhausen).\n\n[549] Cf. Amos: _Seek Me_ = _Seek the good_; and Jesus: _Not every\none that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord; but he that doeth the will of My\nFather in heaven_.\n\n[550] So LXX., but Hebrew _it_.\n\n[551] Davidson's _Syntax_, \u00a7 136, Rem. 1, and \u00a7 71, Rom. 4.\n\n[552] So by the accents runs the verse, but, as Wellhausen has\npointed out, both its sense and its assonance are better expressed by\nanother arrangement: _Hath it grown up?_ then _it hath no shoot, nor\nbringeth forth fruit_.\n\n \u00ean lo \u1e63emach,\n b'li ya'aseh qemach.\n\nYet to this there is a grammatical obstacle.\n\n[553] Wellhausen's reading _to Egypt with love gifts_ scarcely suits\nthe verb _go up_. Notice the play upon P(h)ere', _wild-ass_ and\nEphra'[\u00eem].\n\n[554] So LXX. reads. Heb.: _they shall involve themselves with\ntribute to the king of princes_, presumably the Assyrian monarch.\n\n[555] So LXX.\n\n[556] Text obscure.\n\n[557] LXX. addition here is plainly borrowed from ix. 3. For the\nreasons for omitting ver. 14 see above, p. 223.\n\n[558] ii. 16.\n\n[559] On this verse see more particularly below, pp. 340 ff.\n\n[560] So LXX.\n\n[561] Read \u05d9\u05e2\u05e8\u05db\u05d5. Cf. with the whole passage iii. 4 f.\n\n[562] \u05dc\u05d7\u05de\u05dd for \u05dc\u05d4\u05dd.\n\n[563] \u05d9\u05b8\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d0\u05d5\u05bc.\n\n[564] Plural: so LXX.\n\n[565] Others read _they are gone to Assyria_.\n\n[566] Literally _knows_. See below, p. 321, _n._ 9.\n\n[567] See above, p. 28.\n\n[568] So, after the LXX., by taking \u05d4\u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05e7\u05d5 with this verse, 8,\ninstead of with ver. 9.\n\n[569] iv. 12.\n\n[570] iv. 13, 14.\n\n[571] Here, between vv. 11 and 12, Wellhausen with justice proposes\nto insert ver. 16.\n\n[572] So Wellhausen, after LXX.; probably correct.\n\n[573] So we may attempt to echo the play on the words.\n\n[574] Cf., _e.g._, the _Proverbs of Ptah-Hotep_ the Egyptian, _circa_\n2500 B.C. \"There is no prudence in taking part in it, and thousands\nof men destroy themselves in order to enjoy a moment, brief as a\ndream, while they gain death so as to know it. It is a villainous\n... that of a man who excites himself (?); if he goes on to carry it\nout, his mind abandons him. For as for him who is without repugnance\nfor such an [act], there is no good sense at all in him.\"--From the\ntranslation in _Records of the Past_, Second Series, Vol. III., p. 24.\n\n[575] 2 Peter i.\n\n[576] Doubtful. The Heb. text gives an inappropriate if not\nimpossible clause, even if \u05d9\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05d4 be taken from a root \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05d7, to _set_\nor _produce_ (Barth, _Etym. Stud._, 66). LXX.: \u1f41 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n(A.Q. \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd), \"her [the vine's] fruit flourishing.\" Some\nparallel is required to \u05d1\u05e7\u05e7 of the first clause; and it is possible\nthat it may have been from a root \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05d7\u05b7 or \u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05d7, corresponding to\nArabic s\u00e2\u1e25, \"to wander\" in the sense of scattering or being scattered.\n\n[577] After LXX.\n\n[578] Doubtful. Lawsuits?\n\n[579] \"Calf,\" \"inhabitants\"--so LXX.\n\n[580] LXX. supplies.\n\n[581] See above, p. 263.\n\n[582] Very uncertain. Wellhausen reads _from his idol_, \u05de\u05e2\u05e6\u05d1\u05d5.\n\n[583] \u05e7\u05e6\u05e3: compare Arabic q\u1e63f, \"to break\"; but there is also the\nassonant Arabic q\u1e63b, \"reed.\" The Rabbis translate _foam_: cf. the\nother meaning of \u05e7\u05e6\u05e3--outbreak of anger, which suggests _bubble_.\n\n[584] Rosenm\u00fcller: _more than in_. These days are evidently not the\nbeginning of the kingship under Saul (so Wellhausen), for with that\nHosea has no quarrel, but either the idolatry of Micah (Judg. xvii. 3\nff.), or more probably the crime of Benjamin (Judg. xix. 22).\n\n[585] Obscure; text corrupt, and in next verse uncertain.\n\n[586] For the tense of the verse both participles are surely needed.\nWellhausen thinks two redundant.\n\n[587] Deut. xxv. 4; 1 Cor. ix. 9; 1 Tim. v. 18.\n\n[588] LXX.: _fruit of life_.\n\n[589] \u05e6\u05d3\u05e7 surely in the sense in which we find it in Isa. xl. ff.\nLXX.: _the fruits of righteousness shall be yours_.\n\n[590] We shall return to this passage in dealing with Repentance; see\np. 345.\n\n[591] So LXX. Wellhausen suspects authenticity of the whole clause.\n\n[592] Wellhausen proposes to read \u05d1\u05e2\u05e8\u05d9\u05da for \u05d1\u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05da, but there is no\nneed.\n\n[593] See above, p. 216, _n._ 5.\n\n[594] So LXX.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVIII\n\n _THE FATHERHOOD AND HUMANITY OF GOD_\n\n HOSEA xi.\n\n\nFrom the thick jungle of Hosea's travail, the eleventh chapter breaks\nlike a high and open mound. The prophet enjoys the first of his two\nclear visions--that of the Past.[595] Judgment continues to descend.\nIsrael's Sun is near his setting, but before he sinks--\n\n \"A lingering light he fondly throws\n On the dear hills, whence first he rose.\"\n\nAcross these confused and vicious years, through which he has painfully\nmade his way, Hosea sees the tenderness and the romance of the early\nhistory of his people. And although he must strike the old despairing\nnote--that, by the insincerity of the present generation, all the\nancient guidance of their God must end in this!--yet for some moments\nthe blessed memory shines by itself, and God's mercy appears to triumph\nover Israel's ingratitude. Surely their sun will not set; Love must\nprevail. To which assurance a later voice from the Exile has added, in\nverses 10 and 11, a confirmation suitable to its own circumstances.\n\n _When Israel was a child, then I loved him,_\n _And from Egypt I called_ him _to be My son._\n\n\nThe early history of Israel was a romance. Think of it historically.\nBefore the Most High there spread an array of kingdoms and peoples.\nAt their head were three strong princes--sons indeed of God, if all\nthe heritage of the past, the power of the present and the promise of\nthe future be tokens. Egypt, wrapt in the rich and jewelled web of\ncenturies, basked by Nile and Pyramid, all the wonder of the world's\nart in his dreamy eyes. Opposite him Assyria, with barer but more\nmassive limbs, stood erect upon his highlands, grasping in his sword\nthe promise of the world's power. Between the two, and using both\nof them, yet with his eyes westward on an empire of which neither\ndreamed, the Ph\u0153nician on his sea-coast built his storehouses and\nsped his navies, the promise of the world's wealth. It must ever\nremain the supreme romance of history, that the true son of God,\nbearer of His love and righteousness to all mankind, should be found,\nnot only outside this powerful trinity, but in the puny and despised\ncaptive of one of them--in a people that was not a state, that had\nnot a country, that was without a history, and, if appearances be\ntrue, was as yet devoid of even the rudiments of civilisation--a\nchild people and a slave.\n\nThat was the Romance, and Hosea gives us the Grace which made it.\n_When Israel was a child, then I loved him._ The verb is a distinct\nimpulse: _I began, I learned, to love him_. God's eyes, that passed\nunheeding the adult princes of the world, fell upon this little slave\nboy, and He loved him and gave him a career: _from Egypt I called_\nhim _to be My son_.\n\nNow, historically, it was the persuasion of this which made Israel.\nAll their distinctiveness and character, their progress from a\nlevel with other nomadic tribes to the rank of the greatest\nreligious teachers of humanity, started from the memory of these\ntwo facts--that God loved them, and that God called them. This was\nan unfailing conscience--the obligation that they were not their\nown, the irresistible motive to repentance even in their utmost\nbacksliding, the unquenchable hope of a destiny in their direst days\nof defeat and scattering.\n\nSome, of course, may cavil at the narrow, national scale on which such\na belief was held, but let them remember that it was held in trust for\nall mankind. To snarl that Israel felt this sonship to God only for\nthemselves, is to forget that it is they who have persuaded humanity\nthat this is the only kind of sonship worth claiming. Almost every\nother nation of antiquity imagined a filial relation to the deity, but\nit was either through some fabulous physical descent, and then often\nconfined only to kings and heroes, or by some mystical mingling of the\nDivine with the human, which was just as gross and sensuous. Israel\nalone defined the connection as a historical and a moral one. _The sons\nof God are begotten not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor\nof the will of man, but of God._[596] Sonship to God is something not\nphysical, but moral and historical, into which men are carried by a\nsupreme awakening to the Divine love and authority. Israel, it is true,\nfelt this only in a general way for the nation as a whole;[597] but\ntheir conception of it embraced just those moral contents which form\nthe glory of Christ's doctrine of the Divine sonship of the individual.\nThe belief that God is our Father does not come to us with our carnal\nbirth--except in possibility: the persuasion of it is not conferred by\nour baptism except in so far as that is Christ's own seal to the fact\nthat God Almighty loves us and has marked us for His own. To us sonship\nis a becoming, not a being--the awakening of our adult minds into the\nsurprise of a Father's undeserved mercy, into the constraint of His\nauthority and the assurance of the destiny He has laid up for us. It is\nconferred by love, and confirmed by duty. Neither has power brought it,\nnor wisdom, nor wealth, but it has come solely with the wonder of the\nknowledge that God loves us, and has always loved us, as well as in the\nsense, immediately following, of a true vocation to serve Him. Sonship\nwhich is less than this is no sonship at all. But so much as this is\npossible to every man through Jesus Christ. His constant message is\nthat the Father loves every one of us, and that if we _know_[598] that\nlove, we are God's sons indeed. To them who feel it, adoption into the\nnumber and privileges of the sons of God comes with the amazement and\nthe romance which glorified God's choice of the child-slave Israel.\n_Behold_, they cry, _what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon\nus, that we should be called the sons of God_.[599]\n\nBut we cannot be loved by God and left where we are. Beyond the\ngrace there lies the long discipline and destiny. We are called from\nservitude to freedom, from the world to God--each of us to run a\ncourse, and do a work, which can be done by no one else. That Israel\ndid not perceive this was God's sore sorrow with them.\n\n_The more I_[600] _called to them, the farther they went from Me._[601]\n_They to the Ba'alim kept sacrificing, and to images offering\nincense._ But God persevered with grace, and the story is at first\ncontinued in the figure of Fatherhood with which it commenced; then\nit changes to the metaphor of a humane man's goodness to his beasts.\n_Yet I taught Ephraim to walk, holding them on Mine arms,_[602] _but\nthey knew not that I healed them_--presumably when they fell and hurt\nthemselves. _With the cords of a man I would draw them, with bands of\nlove; and I was to them as those who lift up the yoke on their jaws,\nand gently would I give them to eat._[603] It is the picture of a team\nof bullocks, in charge of a kind driver. Israel are no longer the\nwanton young cattle of the previous chapter, which need the yoke firmly\nfastened on their neck,[604] but a team of toiling oxen mounting some\nsteep road. There is no use now for the rough ropes, by which frisky\nanimals are kept to their work; but the driver, coming to his beasts'\nheads, by the gentle touch of his hand at their mouths and by words\nof sympathy _draws_ them after him. _I drew them with cords of a man,\nand with bands of love._ Yet there is the yoke, and it would seem that\ncertain forms of this, when beasts were working upwards, as we should\nsay _against the collar_, pressed and rubbed upon them, so that the\nhumane driver, when he came to their heads, eased the yoke with his\nhands. _I was as they that take the yoke off their jaws_;[605] and\nthen, when they got to the top of the hill, he would rest and feed\nthem. That is the picture, and however uncertain we may feel as to some\nof its details, it is obviously a passage--Ewald says \"the earliest of\nall passages\"--in which \"human means precisely the same as love.\" It\nought to be taken along with that other passage in the great Prophecy\nof the Exile, where God is described as He that led them through _the\ndeep, as an horse in the wilderness, that they should not stumble: as\na beast goeth down into the valley, the Spirit of the Lord gave him\nrest_.[606]\n\nThus then the figure of the fatherliness of God changes into that\nof His gentleness or humanity. Do not let us think that there is\nhere either any descent of the poetry or want of connection between\nthe two figures. The change is true, not only to Israel's, but to\nour own experience. Men are all either the eager children of happy,\nirresponsible days, or the bounden, plodding draught-cattle of life's\nserious burdens and charges. Hosea's double figure reflects human\nlife in its whole range. Which of us has not known this fatherliness\nof the Most High, exercised upon us, as upon Israel, throughout our\nyears of carelessness and disregard? It was God Himself who taught\nand trained us then;--\n\n \"When through the slippery paths of youth\n With heedless steps I ran,\n Thine arm unseen conveyed me safe,\n And led me up to man.\"\n\nThose speedy recoveries from the blunders of early wilfulness, those\nredemptions from the sins of youth--happy were we if we knew that\nit was _He who healed us_. But there comes a time when men pass\nfrom leading-strings to harness--when we feel faith less and duty\nmore--when our work touches us more closely than our God. Death must\nbe a strange transformer of the spirit, yet surely not more strange\nthan life, which out of the eager buoyant child makes in time the\nslow automaton of duty. It is such a stage which the fourth of these\nverses suits, when we look up, not so much for the fatherliness as\nfor the gentleness and humanity of our God. A man has a mystic power\nof a very wonderful kind upon the animals over whom he is placed. On\nany of these wintry roads of ours we may see it, when a kind carter\ngets down at a hill, and, throwing the reins on his beast's back,\nwill come to its head and touch it with his bare hands, and speak to\nit as if it were his fellow; till the deep eyes fill with light, and\nout of these things, so much weaker than itself, a touch, a glance, a\nword, there will come to it new strength to pull the stranded waggon\nonward. The man is as a god to the beast, coming down to help it,\nand it almost makes the beast human that he does so. Not otherwise\ndoes Hosea feel the help which God gives His own on the weary hills\nof life. We need not discipline, for our work is discipline enough,\nand the cares we carry of themselves keep us straight and steady.\nBut we need sympathy and gentleness--this very humanity which the\nprophet attributes to our God. God comes and takes us by the head;\nthrough the mystic power which is above us, but which makes us like\nitself, we are lifted to our task. Let no one judge this incredible.\nThe incredible would be that our God should prove any less to us than\nthe merciful man is to his beast. But we are saved from argument\nby experience. When we remember how, as life has become steep and\nour strength exhausted, there has visited us a thought which has\nsharpened to a word, a word which has warmed to a touch, and we have\ndrawn ourselves together and leapt up new men, can we feel that\nGod was any less in these things, than in the voice of conscience\nor the message of forgiveness, or the restraints of His discipline?\nNay, though the reins be no longer felt, God is at our head, that we\nshould not stumble nor stand still.\n\nUpon this gracious passage there follows one of those swift revulsions\nof feeling, which we have learned almost to expect in Hosea. His\ninsight again overtakes his love. The people will not respond to\nthe goodness of their God; it is impossible to work upon minds so\nfickle and insincere. Discipline is what they need. _He shall return\nto the land of Egypt, or Asshur shall be his king_ (it is still an\nalternative), _for they have refused to return_ to Me....[607] 'Tis but\none more instance of the age-long apostasy of the people. _My people\nhave a bias_[608] _to turn from Me; and though they_ (the prophets)\n_call them upwards, none of them can lift them_.[609]\n\nYet God is God, and though prophecy fail He will attempt His Love\nonce more. There follows the greatest passage in Hosea--deepest if\nnot highest of his book--the breaking forth of that exhaustless mercy\nof the Most High which no sin of man can bar back nor wear out.\n\n _How am I to give thee up, O Ephraim?_\n How _am I to let thee go, O Israel?_\n _How am I to give thee up?_\n _Am I to make an Admah of thee--a \u1e62eboim?_\n _My heart is turned upon Me,\n My compassions begin to boil:_\n _I will not perform the fierceness of Mine anger,_\n _I will not turn to destroy Ephraim;_\n _For God am I and not man,_\n _The Holy One in the midst of thee, yet I come not to\n consume!_[610]\n\nSuch a love has been the secret of Hosea's persistence through so\nmany years with so faithless a people, and now, when he has failed,\nit takes voice to itself and in its irresistible fulness makes this\nlast appeal. Once more before the end let Israel hear God in the\nutterness of His Love!\n\nThe verses are a climax, and obviously to be succeeded by a pause.\nOn the brink of his doom, will Israel turn to such a God, at such a\ncall? The next verse, though dependent for its promise on this same\nexhaustless Love, is from an entirely different circumstance, and\ncannot have been put by Hosea here.[611]\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[595] See above, p. 253.\n\n[596] St. John's Gospel, i. 12, 13.\n\n[597] Or occasionally for the king as the nation's representative.\n\n[598] See below, pp. 321-3.\n\n[599] 1 John iii.\n\n[600] So rightly the LXX.\n\n[601] LXX., rightly separating \u05de\u05b4\u05e4\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05dd into \u05de\u05b4\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b8\u05d9 and \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd,\nwhich latter is the nominative to the next clause.\n\n[602] So again rightly the LXX.\n\n[603] The reading is uncertain. The \u05dc\u05b9\u05d0 of the following verse (6)\nmust be read as the Greek reads it, as \u05dc\u05b9\u05d5, and taken with ver. 5.\n\n[604] x. 11.\n\n[605] Or lifted forward from the neck to the jaws.\n\n[606] Isa. lxiii. 13, 14.\n\n[607] Ver. 6 has an obviously corrupt text, and, weakening as it does\nthe climax of ver. 5, may be an insertion.\n\n[608] _Are hung_ or _swung towards turning away from Me_.\n\n[609] This verse is also uncertain.\n\n[610] For \u05d1\u05e2\u05d9\u05e8, which makes nonsense, read \u05dc\u05d1\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8, _to consume_, or with\nWellhausen amend further \u05dc\u05d1\u05e2\u05e8 \u05d0\u05d5\u05d1\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d0, _I am not willing to consume_.\n\n[611] _They will follow Jehovah; like a lion He will roar, and they\nshall hurry trembling from the west. Like birds shall they hurry\ntrembling from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria, and I\nwill bring them to their homes--'tis the oracle of Jehovah._ Not only\ndoes this verse contain expressions which are unusual to Hosea, and a\nvery strange metaphor, but it is not connected either historically or\nlogically with the previous verse. The latter deals with the people\nbefore God has scattered them--offers them one more chance before\nexile comes on them. But in this verse they are already scattered,\nand just about to be brought back. It is such a promise as both in\nlanguage and metaphor was common among the prophets of the Exile. In\nthe LXX. the verse is taken from chap. xi. and put with chap. xii.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIX\n\n _THE FINAL ARGUMENT_\n\n HOSEA xii.-xiv. 1.\n\n\nThe impassioned call with which last chapter closed was by no means an\nassurance of salvation: _How am I to give thee up, Ephraim? how am I\nto let thee go, Israel?_ On the contrary, it was the anguish of Love,\nwhen it hovers over its own on the brink of the destruction to which\ntheir wilfulness has led them, and before relinquishing them would\nseek, if possible, some last way to redeem. Surely that fatal morrow\nand the people's mad leap into it are not inevitable! At least, before\nthey take the leap, let the prophet go back once more upon the moral\nsituation of to-day, go back once more upon the past of the people, and\nsee if he can find anything else to explain that bias to apostasy[612]\nwhich has brought them to this fatal brink--anything else which may\nmove them to repentance even there. So in chaps. xii. and xiii. Hosea\nturns upon the now familiar trail of his argument, full of the Divine\njealousy, determined to give the people one other chance to turn; but\nif they will not, he at least will justify God's relinquishment of\nthem. The chapters throw even a brighter light upon the temper and\nhabits of that generation. They again explore Israel's ancient history\nfor causes of the present decline; and, in especial, they cite the\nspiritual experience of the Father of the nation, as if to show that\nwhat of repentance was possible for him is possible for his posterity\nalso. But once more all hope is seen to be vain; and Hosea's last\ntravail with his obstinate people closes in a doom even more awful than\nits predecessors.\n\nThe division into chapters is probably correct; but while chap. xiii.\nis well-ordered and clear, the arrangement, and in parts the meaning,\nof chap. xii. are very obscure.\n\n\n 1. THE PEOPLE AND THEIR FATHER JACOB.\n\n HOSEA xii.\n\nIn no part even of the difficult Book of Hosea does the sacred text\nbristle with more problems. It may well be doubted whether the\nverses lie in their proper order, or, if they do, whether we have\nthem entire as they came from the prophet, for the connection is\nnot always perceptible.[613] We cannot believe, however, that the\nchapter is a bundle of isolated oracles, for the analogy between\nJacob and his living posterity runs through the whole of it,[614]\nand the refrain that God must requite upon the nation their deeds is\nfound both near the beginning and at the end of the chapter.[615]\nOne is tempted to take the two fragments about the Patriarch (vv.\n4, 5, and 13 f.) by themselves, and the more so that ver. 8 would\nfollow so suitably on either ver. 2 or ver. 3. But this clue is not\nsufficient; and till one more evident is discovered, it is perhaps\nbest to keep to the extant arrangement.[616]\n\nAs before, the argument starts from the falseness of Israel, which is\nillustrated in the faithlessness of their foreign relations. _Ephraim\nhath compassed Me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit, and\nJudah_ ...[617] _Ephraim herds the wind_[618] _and hunts the sirocco.\nAll day long they heap up falsehood and fraud:_[619] _they strike\na bargain with Assyria, and carry oil to Egypt_, as Isaiah also\ncomplained.[620]\n\n_Jehovah hath a quarrel with Israel_[621] _and is about to visit upon\nJacob his ways; according to his deeds will He requite him. In the\nwomb he supplanted his brother, and in his man's strength he wrestled\nwith God._[622] _Yea, he wrestled with_ the _Angel and prevailed; he\nwept and besought of Him mercy. At Bethel he met with Him, and there\nHe spake with him_[623] (or _with us_--that is, in the person of\nour father)....[624] _So thou by thy God_--by His help,[625] for no\nother way is possible except, like thy father, through wrestling with\nHim--_shouldest return: keep leal love and justice, and wait on thy\nGod without ceasing_.[626] To this passage we shall return in dealing\nwith Hosea's doctrine of Repentance.\n\nIn characteristic fashion the discourse now swerves from the ideal to\nthe real state of the people.\n\n_Canaan!_ So the prophet nicknames his mercenary generation.[627]\n_With false balances in his hand, he loves to defraud. For Ephraim\nsaid_, Ah but _I have grown rich, I have won myself wealth._[628]\n_None of my gains can touch me with guilt which is sin._[629] _But\nI, Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt--I could make thee dwell\nin tents again, as in the days of the Assembly_ in Horeb--I could\ndestroy all this commercial civilisation of thine, and reduce thee to\nthine ancient level of nomadic life--_and I spake to the prophets:\nit was I who multiplied vision, and by the hand of the prophets gave\nparables. If Gilead_ be for _idolatry, then shall it become vanity!_\nIf _in Gilgal_--Stone-Circle--_they sacrifice bullocks,_[630]\n_stone-heaps shall their altars become among the furrows of the\nfield._ One does not see the connection of these verses with the\npreceding. But now the discourse oscillates once more to the national\nfather, and the parallel between his own and his people's experience.\n\n_And Jacob fled to the land_[631] _of Aram, and Israel served for\na wife, and for a wife he herded_ sheep. _And by a prophet Jehovah\nbrought Israel up from Egypt, and by a prophet he was shepherded. And\nEphraim hath given bitter provocation; but his blood-guiltiness shall\nbe upon him, and his Lord shall return it to him._\n\nI cannot trace the argument here.\n\n\n 2. THE LAST JUDGMENT.\n\n HOSEA xiii.-xiv. 1.\n\nThe crisis draws on. On the one hand Israel's sin, accumulating,\nbulks ripe for judgment. On the other the times grow more fatal, or\nthe prophet more than ever feels them so. He will gather once again\nthe old truths on the old lines--the great past when Jehovah was God\nalone, the descent to the idols and the mushroom monarchs of to-day,\nthe people, who once had been strong, sapped by luxury, forgetful,\nstupid, not to be roused. The discourse has every mark of being\nHosea's latest. There is clearness and definiteness beyond anything\nsince chap. iv. There are ease and lightness of treatment, a playful\nsarcasm, as if the themes were now familiar both to the prophet and\nhis audience. But, chiefly, there is the passion--so suitable to last\nwords--of how different it all might have been, if to this crisis\nIsrael had come with store of strength instead of guilt. How these\nyears, with their opening into the great history of the world, might\nhave meant a birth for the nation, which instead was lying upon them\nlike a miscarried child in the mouth of the womb! It was a fatality\nGod Himself could not help in. Only death and hell remained. Let\nthem, then, have their way! Samaria must expiate her guilt in the\nworst horrors of war.\n\nInstead of with one definite historical event, this last effort of\nHosea opens more naturally with a summary of all Ephraim's previous\nhistory. The tribe had been the first in Israel till they took to idols.\n\n_Whenever Ephraim spake there was trembling._[632] _Prince_[633] _was\nhe in Israel; but he fell into guilt through the Ba'al, and so--died.\nEven now they continue to sin and make them a smelting of their\nsilver, idols after their own model,_[634] _smith's work all of it.\nTo them_--to such things--_they speak! Sacrificing men kiss calves!_\nIn such unreason have they sunk. They cannot endure. _Therefore shall\nthey be like the morning cloud and like the dew that early vanisheth,\nlike chaff which whirleth up from the floor and like smoke from the\nwindow. And I was thy God_[635] _from the land of Egypt; and god\nbesides Me thou knowest not, nor saviour has there been any but\nMyself. I shepherded_[636] _thee in the wilderness, in the land of\ndroughts_--long before they came among the gods of fertile Canaan.\nBut once they came hither, _the more pasture they had, the more they\nate themselves full, and the more they ate themselves full, the more\nwas their heart uplifted, so they forgat Me. So that I must be_[637]\n_to them like a lion, like a leopard on the way I must leap._[638] _I\nwill fall on them like a bear robbed of its young, and will tear the\ncaul of their hearts, and will devour them like a lion--wild beasts\nshall rend them._[639]\n\nWhen _He hath destroyed thee, O Israel--who then may help thee?_[640]\n_Where is thy king now? that he may save thee, or all thy princes?\nthat they may rule thee;_[641] _those of whom thou hast said, Give\nme a king and princes._ Aye, _I give thee a king in Mine anger, and\nI take him away in My wrath!_ Fit summary of the short and bloody\nreigns of these last years.\n\n_Gathered is Ephraim's guilt, stored up is his sin._ The nation is\npregnant--but with guilt! _Birth pangs seize him, but_--the figure\nchanges, with Hosea's own swiftness, from mother to child--_he is an\nimpracticable son;_[642] _for_ this _is no time to stand in the mouth\nof the womb_. The years that might have been the nation's birth are by\ntheir own folly to prove their death. Israel lies in the way of its\nown redemption--how truly this has been forced home upon them in one\nchapter after another! Shall God then step in and work a deliverance on\nthe brink of death? _From the hand of Sheol shall I deliver them? from\ndeath shall I redeem them?_ Nay, let death and Sheol have their way.\n_Where are thy plagues, O death? where thy destruction, Sheol?_ Here\nwith them. _Compassion is hid from Mine eyes._\n\nThis great verse has been very variously rendered. Some have taken\nit as a promise: _I will deliver ... I will redeem...._ So the\nSeptuagint translated, and St. Paul borrowed, not the whole Greek\nverse, but its spirit and one or two of its terms, for his triumphant\nchallenge to death in the power of the Resurrection of Christ.[643]\nAs it stands in Hosea, however, the verse must be a threat. The last\nclause unambiguously abjures mercy, and the statement that His people\nwill not be saved, for God cannot save them, is one in thorough\nharmony with all Hosea's teaching.[644]\n\nAn appendix follows with the illustration of the exact form which\ndoom shall take. As so frequently with Hosea, it opens with a play\nupon the people's name, which at the same time faintly echoes the\nopening of the chapter.\n\n_Although he among his brethren_[645] _is the fruit-bearer_--yaphri',\nhe Ephraim--_there shall come an east wind, a wind of Jehovah rising\nfrom the wilderness, so that his fountain dry up and his spring be\nparched_. He--_himself_, not the Assyrian, but Menahem, who had to\nsend gold to the Assyrian--_shall strip the treasury of all its\nprecious jewels. Samaria must bear her guilt: for she hath rebelled\nagainst her God._ To this simple issue has the impenitence of the\npeople finally reduced the many possibilities of those momentous\nyears; and their last prophet leaves them looking forward to the\ncrash which came some dozen years later in the invasion and captivity\nof the land. _They shall fall by the sword; their infants shall be\ndashed in pieces, and their women with child ripped up._ Horrible\ndetails, but at that period certain to follow every defeat in war.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[612] xi. 7.\n\n[613] This is especially true of vv. 11 and 12.\n\n[614] Even in the most detachable portion, vv. 8-10, where the \u05d0\u05d5\u05df of\nver. 9 seems to refer to the \u05d1\u05d0\u05d5\u05e0\u05d5 of ver. 4.\n\n[615] Viz. in vv. 3 and 15.\n\n[616] Beer indeed, at the close of a very ingenious analysis of\nthe chapter (_Z.A.T.W._, 1893, pp. 281 ff.), claims to have proved\nthat it contains \"eine wohlgegliederte Rede des Propheten\" (p.\n292). But he reaches this conclusion only by several forced and\nprecarious arguments. Especially unsound do his pleas appear that\nin 8_b_ \u05dc\u05e2\u05e9\u05e7 is a play upon the root-meaning of \u05db\u05e0\u05e2\u05df, \"lowly\"; that\n\u05db\u05e0\u05e2\u05df, in analogy to the \u05d1\u05d1\u05d8\u05df of ver. 4, is the crude original, the\nraw material, of the Ephraim of ver. 9; and that \u05de\u05d5\u05e2\u05d3 \u05db\u05d9\u05de\u05d9 is \"the\ndetermined time\" of the coming judgment on Israel.\n\n[617] Something is written about Judah (remember what was said\nabove about Hosea's treble parallels), but the text is too obscure\nfor translation. The theory that it has been altered by a later\nJud\u00e6an writer in favour of his own people is probably correct: the\nAuthorised Version translates in favour of Judah; so too Guthe\nin Kautzsch's _Bibel_. But an adverse statement is required by\nthe parallel clauses, and the Hebrew text allows this: _Judah is\nstill wayward with God, and with the Holy One who is faithful_. So\nvirtually Ewald, Hitzig, W\u00fcnsche, Nowack and Cheyne. But Cornill\nand Wellhausen read the second half of the clause as \u05e0\u05e6\u05de\u05d3 \u05e2\u05dd\u05be\u05e7\u05d3\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd,\n_profanes himself with Qedeshim_ (_Z.A.T.W._, 1887, pp. 286 ff.).\n\n[618] Why should not Hosea, the master of many forced phrases, have\nalso uttered this one? This in answer to Wellhausen.\n\n[619] So LXX., reading \u05e9\u05d5\u05d0 for \u05e9\u05d3.\n\n[620] Isa. xxx. 6.\n\n[621] Heb. _Judah_, but surely Israel is required by the next verse,\nwhich is a play upon the two names Israel and Jacob.\n\n[622] _Supplanted_ is 'aqab, the presumable root of Ja'aqab (Jacob).\n_Wrestled with God_ is Sarah eth Elohim, the presumable origin of\nYisra'el (Israel).\n\n[623] Heb. _us_, LXX. _them_.\n\n[624] Ver. 6--_And Jehovah God of Hosts, Jehovah is His memorial_,\n_i.e._ name--is probably an insertion for the reasons mentioned\nabove, pp. 204 f.\n\n[625] This, the most natural rendering of the Hebrew phrase, has been\ncuriously omitted by Beer, who says that \u05d1\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05da can only mean _to thy\nGod_. Hitzig: \"durch deinen Gott.\"\n\n[626] Some take these words as addressed by Jehovah at Bethel to the\nPatriarch.\n\n[627] So nearly all interpreters. Hitzig aptly quotes Polybius, _De\nVirtute_, L. ix.: \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03b9\u03be\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.. One\nmight also refer to the Romans' idea of the \"Punica fides.\"\n\n[628] Or, full man's strength: ct. ver. 4.\n\n[629] But the LXX. reads: _All his gains shalt not be found of him\nbecause of the iniquity which he has sinned_; and Wellhausen emends\nthis to: _All his gain sufficeth not for the guilt which it has\nincurred_.\n\n[630] Others _to demons_.\n\n[631] Field, but here in sense of territory. See _Hist. Geog._, pp.\n79 f.\n\n[632] Uncertain.\n\n[633] \u05e0\u05e9\u05d9\u05d0 for \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0.\n\n[634] Read with Ewald \u05db\u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05ea\u05dd. LXX. read \u05db\u05ea\u05de\u05d5\u05ea.\n\n[635] Here the LXX. makes the insertion noted on pp. 203, 226.\n\n[636] So LXX., \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u05da.\n\n[637] Read \u05d5\u05b6\u05d0\u05b1\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9.\n\n[638] \u05d0\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05e8, usually taken as first fut. of \u05e9\u05d5\u05e8, to lurk. But there\nis a root of common use in Arabic, sar, to spring up suddenly, of\nwine into the head or of a lion on its prey; saw\u00e2r, \"the springer,\"\nis one of the Arabic names for lion.\n\n[639] We shall treat this passage later in connection with Hosea's\ndoctrine of the knowledge of God: see pp. 330 f.\n\n[640] After the LXX.\n\n[641] Read with Houtsma \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8\u05d5\u05da \u05e9\u05e8\u05d9\u05da \u05d5\u05db\u05dc.\n\n[642] Literally a _son not wise_, perhaps a name given to children\nwhose birth was difficult.\n\n[643] The LXX. reads: \u03a0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f21 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u00b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u1fb4\u03b4\u03b7; But Paul says: \u03a0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bd\u1fd6\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd; I Cor. xv. 55 (Westcott and Hort's Ed.).\n\n[644] The following is a list of the interpretations of verse 14.\n\nA. Taken as a threat 1. \"It is I who redeemed you from the grip of\nthe grave, and who delivered you from death--but now I will call up\nthe words (_sic_) of death against you; for repentance is hid from\nMy eyes.\" So Raschi. 2. \"I would have redeemed them from the grip of\nSheol, etc., if they had been wise, but being foolish I will bring\non them the plagues of death.\" So Kimchi, Eichhorn, Simson, etc. 3\n\"Should I\" or \"shall I deliver them from the hand of Sheol, redeem\nthem from death?\" etc., as in the text above. So W\u00fcnsche, Wellhausen,\nGuthe in Kautzsch's _Bibel._ etc.\n\nB. Taken as a promise. \"From the hand of Sheol I will deliver\nthem, from death redeem them,\" etc. So Umbreit, Ewald, Hitzig and\nAuthorised and Revised English Versions. In this case repentance\nin the last clause must be taken as _resentment_ (Ewald). But, as\nEwald sees, the whole verse must then be put in a parenthesis, as an\nejaculation of promise in the midst of a context that only threatens.\nSome without change of word render: \"I will be thy plagues, O death?\nI will be thy sting, O hell.\" So the Authorised English Version.\n\n[645] Text doubtful.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XX\n\n \"_I WILL BE AS THE DEW_\"\n\n HOSEA xiv. 2-10.\n\n\nLike the Book of Amos, the Book of Hosea, after proclaiming the\npeople's inevitable doom, turns to a blessed prospect of their\nrestoration to favour with God. It will be remembered that we decided\nagainst the authenticity of such an epilogue in the Book of Amos;\nand it may now be asked, how can we come to any other conclusion\nwith regard to the similar peroration in the Book of Hosea? For the\nfollowing reasons.\n\nWe decided against the genuineness of the closing verses of Amos,\nbecause their sanguine temper is opposed to the temper of the whole\nof the rest of the book, and because they neither propose any ethical\nconditions for the attainment of the blessed future, nor in their\npicture of the latter do they emphasise one single trace of the\njustice, or the purity, or the social kindliness, on which Amos has\nso exclusively insisted as the ideal relations of Israel to Jehovah.\nIt seemed impossible to us that Amos could imagine the perfect\nrestoration of his people in the terms only of requickened nature,\nand say nothing about righteousness, truth and mercy towards the\npoor. The prospect which now closes his book is psychologically alien\nto him, and, being painted in the terms of later prophecy, may be\njudged to have been added by some prophet of the Exile, speaking from\nthe standpoint, and with the legitimate desires, of his own day.\n\nBut the case is very different for this epilogue in Hosea. In the\nfirst place, Hosea has not only continually preached repentance, and\nbeen, from his whole affectionate temper of mind, unable to believe\nrepentance impossible; but he has actually predicted the restoration\nof his people upon certain well-defined and ethical conditions. In\nchap. ii. he has drawn for us in detail the whole prospect of God's\nsuccessful treatment of his erring spouse. Israel should be weaned\nfrom their sensuousness and its accompanying trust in idols by a\nsevere discipline, which the prophet describes in terms of their\nancient wanderings in the wilderness. They should be reduced, as at\nthe beginning of their history, to moral converse with their God; and\nabjuring the Ba'alim (later chapters imply also their foreign allies\nand foolish kings and princes) should return to Jehovah, when He,\nhaving proved that these could not give them the fruits of the land\nthey sought after, should Himself quicken the whole course of nature\nto bless them with the fertility of the soil and the friendliness\neven of the wild beasts.\n\nNow in the epilogue and its prospect of Israel's repentance we find\nno feature, physical or moral, which has not already been furnished\nby these previous promises of the book. All their ethical conditions\nare provided; nothing but what they have conceived of blessing is\nagain conceived. Israel is to abjure senseless sacrifice and come\nto Jehovah with rational and contrite confession.[646] She is to\nabjure her foreign alliances.[647] She is to trust in the fatherly\nlove of her God.[648] He is to heal her,[649] and His anger is to\nturn away.[650] He is to restore nature, just as described in chap.\nii., and the scenery of the restoration is borrowed from Hosea's own\nGalilee. There is, in short, no phrase or allusion of which we can\nsay that it is alien to the prophet's style or environment, while the\nvery keynotes of his book--_return, backsliding, idols the work of\nour hands, such pity as a father hath_, and perhaps even the _answer_\nor _converse_ of verse 9--are all struck once more.\n\nThe epilogue then is absolutely different from the epilogue to\nthe Book of Amos, nor can the present expositor conceive of the\npossibility of a stronger case for the genuineness of any passage\nof Scripture. The sole difficulty seems to be the place in which we\nfind it--a place where its contradiction to the immediately preceding\nsentence of doom is brought out into relief. We need not suppose,\nhowever, that it was uttered by Hosea in immediate proximity to\nthe latter, nor even that it formed his last word to Israel. But\ngranting only (as the above evidence obliges us to do) that it is\nthe prophet's own, this fourteenth chapter may have been a discourse\naddressed by him at one of those many points when, as we know, he\nhad some hope of the people's return. Personally, I should think\nit extremely likely that Hosea's ministry closed with that final,\nhopeless proclamation in chap. xiii.: no other conclusion was\npossible so near the fall of Samaria, and the absolute destruction of\nthe Northern Kingdom. But Hosea had already in chap. ii. painted the\nvery opposite issue as a possible ideal for his people; and during\nsome break in those years when their insincerity was less obtrusive,\nand the final doom still uncertain, the prophet's heart swung to\nits natural pole in the exhaustless and steadfast love of God, and\nhe uttered his unmingled gospel. That either himself or the unknown\neditor of his prophecies should have placed it at the very end of his\nbook is not less than what we might have expected. For if the book\nwere to have validity beyond the circumstances of its origin, beyond\nthe judgment which was so near and so inevitable, was it not right to\nlet something else than the proclamation of this latter be its last\nword to men? was it not right to put as the conclusion of the whole\nmatter the ideal eternally valid for Israel--the gospel which is ever\nGod's last word to His people?[651]\n\nAt some point or other, then, in the course of his ministry, there\nwas granted to Hosea an open vision like to the vision which he has\nrecounted in the second chapter. He called on the people to repent.\nFor once, and in the power of that Love to which he had already said\nall things are possible, it seemed to him as if repentance came.\nThe tangle and intrigue of his generation fell away; fell away the\nreeking sacrifices and the vain show of worship. The people turned\nfrom their idols and puppet-kings, from Assyria and from Egypt, and\nwith contrite hearts came to God Himself, who, healing and loving,\nopened to them wide the gates of the future. It is not strange that\ndown this spiritual vista the prophet should see the same scenery\nas daily filled his bodily vision. Throughout Galilee Lebanon[652]\ndominates the landscape. You cannot lift your eyes from any spot of\nNorthern Israel without resting them upon the vast mountain. From the\nunhealthy jungles of the Upper Jordan, the pilgrim lifts his heart to\nthe cool hill air above, to the ever-green cedars and firs, to the\nstreams and waterfalls that drop like silver chains off the great\nbreastplate of snow. From Esdraelon and every plain the peasants\nlook to Lebanon to store the clouds and scatter the rain; it is not\nfrom heaven but from Hermon that they expect the dew, their only\nhope in the long drought of summer. Across Galilee and in Northern\nEphraim, across Bashan and in Northern Gilead, across Hauran and on\nthe borders of the desert, the mountain casts its spell of power, its\nlavish promise of life.[653] Lebanon is everywhere the summit of the\nland, and there are points from which it is as dominant as heaven.\n\nNo wonder then that our northern prophet painted the blessed future\nin the poetry of the Mountain--its air, its dew and its trees.\nOther seers were to behold, in the same latter days, the mountain\nof the Lord above the tops of the mountains; the ordered city, her\nsteadfast walls salvation, and her open gates praise; the wealth of\nthe Gentiles flowing into her, profusion of flocks for sacrifice,\nprofusion of pilgrims; the great Temple and its solemn services; and\n_the glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, fir-tree and pine and\nbox-tree together, to beautify the place of My Sanctuary_.[654] But,\nwith his home in the north, and weary of sacrifice and ritual, weary\nof everything artificial whether it were idols or puppet-kings, Hosea\nturns to the _glory of Lebanon_ as it lies, untouched by human tool\nor art, fresh and full of peace from God's own hand. Like that other\nseer of Galilee, Hosea in his vision of the future _saw no temple\ntherein_.[655] His sacraments are the open air, the mountain breeze,\nthe dew, the vine, the lilies, the pines; and what God asks of men\nare not rites nor sacrifices, but life and health, fragrance and\nfruitfulness, beneath the shadow and the Dew of His Presence.\n\n_Return, O Israel, to Jehovah thy God, for thou hast stumbled by\nthine iniquity. Take with you words_[656] _and return unto Jehovah.\nSay unto Him, Remove iniquity altogether, and take good, so will we\nrender the calves_[657] _of our lips_; confessions, vows, these are the\nsacrificial offerings God delights in. Which vows are now registered:--\n\n _Asshur shall not save us;_\n _We will not ride upon horses_ (from Egypt);\n _And we will say no more, \"O our God,\" to the work of our\n hands:_\n _For in Thee the fatherless findeth a father's pity._\n\nAlien help, whether in the protection of Assyria or the cavalry which\nPharaoh sends in return for Israel's homage; alien gods, whose idols\nwe have ourselves made,--we abjure them all, for we remember how Thou\ndidst promise to show a father's love to the people whom Thou didst\nname, for their mother's sins, Lo-Ruhamah, the Unfathered. Then God\nreplies:--\n\n _I will heal their backsliding,_\n _I will love them freely:_\n _For Mine anger is turned away from them._\n _I will be as the dew unto Israel:_\n _He shall blossom as the lily,_\n _And strike his roots_ deep _as Lebanon;_\n _His branches shall spread,_\n _And his beauty shall be as the olive-tree,_\n _And his smell as Lebanon--_\n\nsmell of clear mountain air with the scent of the pines upon it. The\nfigure in the end of ver. 6 seems forced to some critics, who have\nproposed various emendations, such as \"like the fast-rooted trees\nof Lebanon,\"[658] but any one who has seen how the mountain himself\nrises from great roots, cast out across the land like those of some\ngiant oak, will not feel it necessary to mitigate the metaphor.\n\nThe prophet now speaks:--\n\n _They shall return and dwell in His shadow._\n _They shall live well-watered as a garden,_\n _Till they flourish like the vine,_\n _And be fragrant like the wine of Lebanon._[659]\n\nGod speaks:--\n\n _Ephraim, what has he_[660] _to do any more with idols!_\n _I have spoken_ for him, _and I will look after him._\n _I am like an ever-green fir;_\n _From Me is thy fruit found._\n\nThis version is not without its difficulties; but the alternative\nthat God is addressed and Ephraim is the speaker--_Ephraim_ says,\n_What have I to do any more with idols? I answer and look to Him:\nI am like a green fir-tree; from me is Thy fruit found_--has even\ngreater difficulties,[661] although it avoids the unusual comparison\nof the Deity with a tree. The difficulties of both interpretations\nmay be overcome by dividing the verse between God and the people:--\n\n _Ephraim! what has he to do any more with idols:_\n _I have spoken_ for him, _and will look after him._\n\nIn this case the _speaking_ would be intended in the same sense as\nthe _speaking_ in chap. ii. to the heavens and earth, that they might\n_speak_ to the _corn and wine_.[662] Then Ephraim replies:--\n\n _I am like an ever-green fir-tree;_\n _From me is Thy fruit found._\n\nBut the division appears artificial, and the text does not suggest\nthat the two _I_'s belong to different speakers. The first version\ntherefore is the preferable.\n\n * * * * *\n\nSome one has added a summons to later generations to lay this book\nto heart in face of their own problems and sins. May we do so for\nourselves!\n\n _Who is wise, that he understands these things?_\n _Intelligent, that he knows them?_\n _Yea, straight are the ways of Jehovah,_\n _And the righteous shall walk therein, but sinners shall\n stumble upon them._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[646] Cf. vi. 6, etc.\n\n[647] Cf. xii. 2, etc.\n\n[648] Cf. i. 7; ii. 22, 25.\n\n[649] Cf. xi. 4.\n\n[650] Cf. xi. 8, 9.\n\n[651] Since preparing the above for the press there has come into\nmy hands Professor Cheyne's \"Introduction\" to the new edition of\nRobertson Smith's _The Prophets of Israel_, in which (p. xix.) he\nreaches with regard to Hosea xiv. 2-10 conclusions entirely opposite\nto those reached above. Professor Cheyne denies the passage to Hosea\non the grounds that it is akin in language and imagery and ideas to\nwritings of the age which begins with Jeremiah, and which among other\nworks includes the Song of Songs. But, as has been shown above, the\n\"language, imagery and ideas\" are all akin to what Professor Cheyne\nadmits to be genuine prophecies of Hosea; and the likeness to them\nof, _e.g._, Jer. xxxi. 10-20 may be explained on the same ground as\nso much else in Jeremiah, by the influence of Hosea. The allusion\nin ver. 3 suits Hosea's own day more than Jeremiah's. Nor can I\nunderstand what Professor Cheyne means by this: \"The spirituality\nof the tone of vers. 1-3 is indeed surprising (contrast the picture\nin Hos. v. 6).\" Spirituality surprising in the book that contains\n\"I will have love and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God\nrather than burnt-offerings\"! The verse, v. 6, he would contrast\nwith xiv. 1-3 is actually one in which Hosea says that when they go\n\"with flocks and herds\" Israel shall not find God! He says that \"to\nunderstand Hosea aright we must omit it\" (_i.e._ the whole epilogue).\nBut after the argument I have given above it will be plain that if\nwe \"understand Hosea aright\" we have every reason _not_ \"to omit\nit.\" His last contention, that \"to have added anything to the stern\nwarning in xiii. 16 would have robbed it of half its force,\" is fully\nmet by the considerations stated above on p. 310.\n\n[652] By Lebanon in the fourteenth chapter and almost always in the\nOld Testament we must understand not the western range now called\nLebanon, for that makes no impression on the Holy Land, its bulk\nlying too far to the north, but Hermon, the southmost and highest\nsummits of Anti-Lebanon. See _Hist. Geog._, pp. 417 f.\n\n[653] Full sixty miles off, in the Jebel Druze, the ancient Greek\namphitheatres were so arranged that Hermon might fill the horizon of\nthe spectators.\n\n[654] Isa. lx. 13.\n\n[655] Revelation of St. John xxi. 22.\n\n[656] On all this exhortation see below, p. 343.\n\n[657] LXX. _fruit_, \u05e4\u05e8\u05d9 for \u05e4\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd; the whole verse is obscure.\n\n[658] So Guthe; some other plant Wellhausen, who for \u05d5\u05d9\u05da reads \u05d5\u05d9\u05dc\u05db\u05d5.\n\n[659] Ver. 8 obviously needs emendation. The Hebrew text contains at\nleast one questionable construction, and gives no sense: \"They that\ndwell in his shadow shall turn, and revive corn and flourish like\nthe vine, and his fame,\" etc. To cultivate corn and be themselves\nlike a vine is somewhat mixed. The LXX. reads: \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c0\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03b6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03af\u03c4\u1ff3\u00b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03cc\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u0394\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5. It removes\nthe grammatical difficulty from clause 1, which then reads \u05d5\u05d9\u05b8\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d1\u05d5\u05bc\n\u05d9\u05b8\u05e9\u05bb\u05c1\u05d1\u05d5\u05bc \u05d1\u05b0\u05e6\u05b4\u05dc\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9; the supplied _vau_ may easily have dropped after\nthe final _vau_ of the previous word. In the 2nd clause the LXX.\ntakes \u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d5 as an intransitive, which is better suited to the other\nverbs, and adds \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05d9\u05d5 (a form that may have easily\nslipped from the Hebrew text, through its likeness to the preceding\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d5). _And they shall be well-watered._ After this it is probable\nthat \u05d3\u05d2\u05df should read \u05db\u05b7\u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05df. In the 3rd clause the Hebrew text may\nstand. In the 4th \u05d6\u05db\u05e8 may not, as many propose, be taken for \u05d6\u05db\u05e8\u05dd and\ntranslated _their perfume_; but the parallelism makes it now probable\nthat we have a verb here; and if \u05d6\u05db\u05e8 in the Hiph. has the sense\n_to make a perfume_ (cf. Isa. lxvi. 3), there is no reason against\nthe Kal being used in the intransitive sense here. In the LXX. for\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 Q^a reads \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n[660] LXX.\n\n[661] This alternative, which Robertson Smith adopted, \"though not\nwithout some hesitation\" (_Prophets_, 413) is that which follows the\nHebrew text, reading in the first clause \u05dc\u05b4\u05d9, and not, like LXX.,\n\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9, and avoids the unusual figure of comparing Jehovah to a tree.\nBut it does not account for the singular emphasis laid in the second\nclause on the first personal pronoun, and implies that God, whose\nname has not for several verses been mentioned, is meant by the mere\npersonal suffix, \"I will look to Him.\" Wellhausen suggests changing\nthe second clause to _I am his Anat and his Aschera_.\n\n[662] \u05e2\u05e0\u05d4, ii. 23.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXI\n\n _THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD_\n\n HOSEA _passim_.\n\n\nWe have now finished the translation and detailed exposition of\nHosea's prophecies. We have followed his minute examination of his\npeople's character; his criticism of his fickle generation's attempts\nto repent; and his presentation of true religion in contrast to\ntheir shallow optimism and sensual superstitions. We have seen an\ninwardness and spirituality of the highest kind--a love not only warm\nand mobile, but nobly jealous, and in its jealousy assisted by an\nextraordinary insight and expertness in character. Why Hosea should\nbe distinguished above all prophets for inwardness and spirituality\nmust by this time be obvious to us. From his remote watchfulness,\nAmos had seen the nations move across the world as the stars across\nheaven; had seen, within Israel, class distinct from class, and\ngiven types of all: rich and poor; priest, merchant and judge; the\npanic-stricken, the bully; the fraudulent and the unclean. The\nobservatory of Amos was the world, and the nation. But Hosea's was\nthe home; and there he had watched a human soul decay through every\nstage from innocence to corruption. It was a husband's study of a\nwife which made Hosea the most inward of all the prophets. This was\n_the beginning of God's word by him_.[663]\n\nAmong the subjects in the subtle treatment of which Hosea's service\nto religion is most original and conspicuous, there are especially\nthree that deserve a more detailed treatment than we have been able\nto give them. These are the Knowledge of God, Repentance and the Sin\nagainst Love. We may devote a chapter to each of them, beginning in\nthis with the most characteristic and fundamental truth Hosea gave to\nreligion--the Knowledge of God.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIf to the heart there be one pain more fatal than another, it is the\npain of not being understood. That prevents argument: how can you\nreason with one who will not come to quarters with your real self? It\nparalyses influence: how can you do your best with one who is blind\nto your best? It stifles Love; for how dare she continue to speak\nwhen she is mistaken for something else? Here as elsewhere \"against\nstupidity the gods themselves fight in vain.\"\n\nThis anguish Hosea had suffered. As closely as two souls may live\non earth, he had lived with Gomer. Yet she had never wakened to\nhis worth. She must have been a woman with a power of love, or\nsuch a heart had hardly wooed her. He was a man of deep tenderness\nand exquisite powers of expression. His tact, his delicacy, his\nenthusiasm are sensible in every chapter of his book. Gomer must have\ntasted them all before Israel did. Yet she never knew him. It was\nher curse that, being married, she was not awake to the meaning of\nmarriage, and, being married to Hosea, she never appreciated the holy\ntenderness and heroic patience which were deemed by God not unworthy\nof becoming a parable of His own.\n\nNow I think we do not go far wrong if we conclude that it was partly\nthis long experience of a soul that loved, but had neither conscience\nnor ideal in her love, which made Hosea lay such frequent and pathetic\nemphasis upon Israel's _ignorance_ of Jehovah. To have his character\nignored, his purposes baffled, his gifts unappreciated, his patience\nmistaken--this was what drew Hosea into that wonderful sympathy with\nthe heart of God towards Israel which comes out in such passionate\nwords as these: _My people perish for lack of knowledge._[664] _There\nis no troth, nor leal love, nor knowledge of God in the land._[665]\n_They have not known the Lord._[666] _She did not know that I gave her\ncorn and wine._[667] _They knew not that I healed them._[668] _For now,\nbecause thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee._[669] _I will\nhave leal love and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God rather than\nburnt-offerings._[670] Repentance consists in change of knowledge. And\nthe climax of the new life which follows is again knowledge: _I will\nbetroth thee to Me, and thou shall know the Lord._[671] _Israel shall\ncry, My God, we know Thee._[672]\n\nTo understand what Hosea meant by knowledge we must examine the\nsingularly supple word which his language lent him to express it.\nThe Hebrew root \"Yadh'a,\"[673] almost exclusively rendered in the\nOld Testament by the English verb to know, is employed of the many\nprocesses of knowledge, for which richer languages have separate\nterms. It is by turns to perceive, be aware of, recognise, understand\nor conceive, experience and be expert in.[674] But there is besides\nnearly always a practical effectiveness, and in connection with\nreligious objects a moral consciousness.\n\nThe barest meaning is to be aware that something is present or has\nhappened, and perhaps the root meant simply to see.[675] But it was\nthe frequent duty of the prophets to mark the difference between\nperceiving a thing and laying it to heart. Isaiah speaks of the\npeople _seeing_, but not so as _to know_;[676] and Deuteronomy\nrenders the latter sense by adding _with the heart_, which to the\nHebrews was the seat, not of the feeling, but of the practical\nintellect:[677] _And thou knowest with thy heart that as a man\nchastiseth his son, so the Lord your God chastiseth you_.[678]\nUsually, however, the word _know_ suffices by itself. This practical\nvigour naturally developed in such directions as _intimacy_,\n_conviction_, _experience_ and _wisdom_. Job calls his familiars\n_my knowers_;[679] of a strong conviction he says, _I know that my\nRedeemer liveth_,[680] and referring to wisdom, _We are of yesterday\nand know not_;[681] while Ecclesiastes says, _Whoso keepeth the\ncommandment shall know_--that is, _experience_, or _suffer--no\nevil_.[682] But the verb rises into a practical sense--to the\nknowledge that leads a man to regard or care for its object. Job uses\nthe verb _know_ when he would say, _I do not care for my life_;[683]\nand in the description of the sons of Eli, that _they were sons\nof Belial, and did not know God_, it means that they did not have\nany regard for Him.[684] Finally, there is a moral use of the word\nin which it approaches the meaning of conscience: _Their eyes were\nopened, and they knew that they were naked_.[685] They were aware\nof this before, but they felt it now with a new sense. Also it is\nthe mark of the awakened and the fullgrown to know, or to feel, the\ndifference between good and evil.[686]\n\nHere, then, we have a word for _knowing_, the utterance of which\nalmost invariably starts a moral echo, whose very sound, as it were,\nis haunted by sympathy and by duty. It is knowledge, not as an effort\nof, so much as an effect upon, the mind. It is not _to know_ so as to\nsee the fact of, but _to know_ so as to feel the force of; knowledge,\nnot as acquisition and mastery, but as impression, passion. To quote\nPaul's distinction, it is not so much the apprehending as the being\napprehended. It leads to a vivid result--either warm appreciation\nor change of mind or practical effort. It is sometimes the talent\nconceived as the trust, sometimes the enlistment of all the affections.\nIt is knowledge that is followed by shame, or by love, or by reverence,\nor by the sense of a duty. One sees that it closely approaches the\nmeaning of our \"conscience,\" and understands how easily there was\ndeveloped from it the evangelical name for repentance, Metanoia--that\nis, change of mind under a new impression of facts.\n\nThere are three writers who thus use knowledge as the key to\nthe Divine life--in the Old Testament Hosea and the author of\nDeuteronomy, in the New Testament St. John. We likened Amos to St.\nJohn the Baptist: it is not only upon his similar temperament, but\nfar more upon his use of the word knowledge for spiritual purposes,\nthat we may compare Hosea to St. John the Evangelist.\n\nHosea's chief charge against the people is one of stupidity. High and\nlow they are _a people without intelligence_.[687] Once he defines\nthis as want of political wisdom: _Ephraim is a silly dove without\nheart_, or, as we should say, _without brains_;[688] and again, as\ninsensibility to every ominous fact: _Strangers have devoured his\nstrength, and he knoweth it not; yea, grey hairs are scattered upon\nhim, and he knoweth it not_,[689] or, as we should say, _lays it not\nto heart_.\n\nBut Israel's most fatal ignorance is of God Himself. This is the sign\nand the cause of every one of their defects. _There is no troth, nor\nleal love, nor knowledge of God in the land._[690] _They have not\nknown the LORD._[691] _They have not known Me._\n\nWith the causes of this ignorance the prophet has dealt most\nexplicitly in the fourth chapter.[692] They are two: the people's\nown vice and the negligence of their priests. Habitual vice destroys\na people's brains. _Harlotry, wine and new wine take away the heart\nof My people._[693] Lust, for instance, blinds them to the domestic\nconsequences of their indulgence in the heathen worship, _and so\nthe stupid people come to their end_.[694] Again, their want of\npolitical wisdom is due to their impurity, drunkenness and greed to\nbe rich.[695] Let those take heed who among ourselves insist that art\nis independent of moral conditions--that wit and fancy reach their\nbest and bravest when breaking from any law of decency. They lie:\nsuch licence corrupts the natural intelligence of a people, and robs\nthem of insight and imagination.\n\nYet Hosea sees that all the fault does not lie with the common\npeople. Their teachers are to blame, priest and prophet alike, for\nboth _stumble_, and it is true that a people shall be like its\npriests.[696] _The_ priests _have rejected knowledge and forgotten\nthe Torah_ of their God; they think only of the ritual of sacrifice\nand the fines by which they fill their mouths. It was, as we have\nseen, _the_ sin of Israel's religion in the eighth century. To\nthe priests religion was a mass of ceremonies which satisfied the\npeople's superstitions and kept themselves in bread. To the prophets\nit was an equally sensuous, an equally mercenary ecstasy. But to\nHosea religion is above all a thing of the intellect and conscience:\nit is that _knowing_ which is at once common-sense, plain morality\nand the recognition by a pure heart of what God has done and is doing\nin history. Of such a knowledge the priests and prophets are the\nstewards, and it is because they have ignored their trust that the\npeople have been provided with no antidote to the vices that corrupt\ntheir natural intelligence and make them incapable of seeing God.\n\nIn contrast to such ignorance Hosea describes the essential\ntemper and contents of a true understanding of God. Using the word\n_knowledge_, in the passive sense characteristic of his language, not\nso much the acquisition as the impression of facts, an impression\nwhich masters not only a man's thoughts but his heart and will,\nHosea describes the _knowledge of God_ as feeling, character and\nconscience. Again and again he makes it parallel to loyalty,\nrepentance, love and service. Again and again he emphasises that it\ncomes from God Himself. It is not something which men can reach by\ntheir own endeavours, or by the mere easy turning of their fickle\nhearts. For it requires God Himself to speak, and discipline to\nchasten. The only passage in which the knowledge of God is described\nas the immediate prize of man's own pursuit is that prayer of the\npeople on whose facile religiousness Hosea pours his scorn.[697]\n_Let us know, let us follow on to know the Lord_, he heard them say,\nand promise themselves, _As soon as we seek Him we shall find Him_.\nBut God replies that He can make nothing of such ambitions; they\nwill pass away like the morning cloud and the early dew.[698] This\ndiscarded prayer, then, is the only passage in the book in which the\nknowledge of God is described as man's acquisition. Elsewhere, in\nstrict conformity to the temper of the Hebrew word to know, Hosea\npresents the knowledge of the Most High, not as something man finds\nout for himself, but something which comes down on him from above.\n\nThe means which God took to impress Himself upon the heart of His\npeople were, according to Hosea, the events of their history. Hosea,\nindeed, also points to another means. _The Torah of thy God_, which\nin one passage[699] he makes parallel to _knowledge_, is evidently\nthe body of instruction, judicial, ceremonial and social, which has\ncome down by the tradition of the priests. This was not all oral;\npart of it at least was already codified in the form we now know\nas the Book of the Covenant.[700] But Hosea treats of the Torah\nonly in connection with the priests. And the far more frequent and\ndirect means by which God has sought to reveal Himself to the people\nare the great events of their past. These Hosea never tires of\nrecalling. More than any other prophet, he recites the deeds done\nby God in the origins and making of Israel. So numerous are his\nreferences that from them alone we could almost rebuild the early\nhistory. Let us gather them together. The nation's father Jacob _in\nthe womb overreached his brother, and in his manhood strove with\nGod; yea, he strove with the Angel and he overcame_,[701] _he wept\nand supplicated Him; at Bethel he found Him, and there He spake with\nus--Jehovah God of Hosts, Jehovah is His name_.[702] _... And Jacob\nfled to the territory_[703] _of Aram, and he served for a wife, and\nfor a wife he tended sheep. And by a prophet Jehovah brought Israel\nup out of Egypt, and by a prophet he was tended._[704] _When Israel\nwas young,_[705] _then I came to love him, and out of Egypt I called\nMy son._[706] _As often as I called to them, so often did they go\nfrom Me:_[707] _they to the Ba'alim kept sacrificing, and to images\noffering incense. But I taught Ephraim to walk, taking him upon\nMine_[708] _arms, and they did not know that I nursed them._[709] ...\n_Like grapes in the wilderness I found Israel, like the firstfruits\non an early fig-tree I saw your fathers; but they went to Ba'al-Peor,\nand consecrated themselves to the Shame._[710] ... _But I am Jehovah\nthy God from the land of Egypt, and gods besides Me thou knowest not,\nand Saviour there is none but Me. I knew thee in the wilderness, in\nthe land of burning heats. But the more pasture they had, the more\nthey fed themselves full; as they fed themselves full their heart was\nlifted up: therefore they forgat Me._[711] ... _I Jehovah thy God\nfrom the land of Egypt._[712] And all this revelation of God was not\nonly in that marvellous history, but in the yearly gifts of nature\nand even in the success of the people's commerce: _She knew not that\nit was I who have given her the corn and the wine and the oil, and\nsilver have I multiplied to her._[713]\n\nThis, then, is how God gave Israel knowledge of Himself. _First_ it\nbroke upon the Individual, the Nation's Father. And to him it had\nnot come by miracle, but just in the same fashion as it has broken\nupon men from then until now. He woke to find God no tradition, but\nan experience. Amid the strife with others of which life for all so\nlargely consists, Jacob became aware that God also has to be reckoned\nwith, and that, hard as is the struggle for bread and love and\njustice with one's brethren and fellow-men, with the Esaus and with\nthe Labans, a more inevitable wrestle awaits the soul when it is left\nalone in the darkness with the Unseen. Oh, this is our sympathy with\nthose early patriarchs, not that they saw the sea dry up before them\nor the bush ablaze with God, but that upon some lonely battle-field\nof the heart they also endured those moments of agony, which imply a\nmore real Foe than we ever met in flesh and blood, and which leave\nupon us marks deeper than the waste of toil or the rivalry of the\nworld can inflict. So the Father of the Nation came to _find_ God at\nBethel, and there, adds Hosea, where the Nation still worship, God\n_spake with us_[714] in the person of our Father.\n\nThe _second_ stage of the knowledge of God was when the Nation awoke\nto His leading, and _through a prophet_, Moses, were _brought up out\nof Egypt_. Here again no miracle is adduced by Hosea, but with full\nheart he appeals to the grace and the tenderness of the whole story.\nTo him it is a wonderful romance. Passing by all the empires of\nearth, the Almighty chose for Himself this people that was no people,\nthis tribe that were the slaves of Egypt. And the choice was of love\nonly: _When Israel was young I came to love him, and out of Egypt I\ncalled My son._ It was the adoption of a little slave-boy, adoption\nby the heart; and the fatherly figure continues, _I taught Ephraim\nto walk, taking him upon Mine arms_. It is just the same charm, seen\nfrom another point of view, when Hosea hears God say that He had\n_found Israel like grapes in the wilderness, like the firstfruits on\nan early fig-tree I saw your fathers_.\n\nNow these may seem very imperfect figures of the relation of God to\nthis one people, and the ideas they present may be felt to start more\ndifficulties than ever their poetry could soothe to rest: as, for\ninstance, why Israel alone was chosen--why this of all tribes was\ngiven such an opportunity to know the Most High. With these questions\nprophecy does not deal, and for Israel's sake had no need to deal.\nWhat alone Hosea is concerned with is the Character discernible in\nthe origin and the liberation of his people. He hears that Character\nspeak for itself; and it speaks of a love and of a joy, to find\nfigures for which it goes to childhood and to spring--to the love a\nman feels for a child, to the joy a man feels at the sight of the\nfirstfruits of the year. As the human heart feels in those two great\ndawns, when nothing is yet impossible, but all is full of hope and\npromise, so humanly, so tenderly, so joyfully had God felt towards\nHis people. Never again say that the gods of Greece were painted more\nliving or more fair! The God of Israel is Love and Springtime to His\npeople. Grace, patience, pure joy of hope and possibility--these are\nthe Divine elements which this spiritual man, Hosea, sees in the\nearly history of his people, and not the miraculous, about which,\nfrom end to end of his book, he is utterly silent.\n\nIt is ignorance, then, of such a Character, so evident in these facts\nof their history, with which Hosea charges his people--not ignorance\nof the facts themselves, not want of devotion to their memory, for\nthey are a people who crowd the sacred scenes of the past, at Bethel,\nat Gilgal, at Beersheba, but ignorance of the Character which shines\nthrough the facts. Hosea also calls it forgetfulness, for the people\nonce had knowledge.[715] The cause of their losing it has been their\nprosperity in Canaan: _As their pastures were increased they grew\nsatisfied; as they grew satisfied their heart was lifted up, and\ntherefore they forgat Me._[716]\n\nEqually instructive is the method by which Hosea seeks to move Israel\nfrom this oblivion and bring them to a true knowledge of God. He\ninsists that their recovery can only be the work of God Himself--the\nliving God working in their lives to-day as He did in the past of\nthe nation. To those past deeds it is useless for this generation to\ngo back, and seek again the memory of which they have disinherited\nthemselves. Let them rather realise that the same God still lives.\nThe knowledge of Him may be recovered by appreciating His deeds in\nthe life of to-day. And these deeds must first of all be violence\nand terror, if only to rouse them from their sensuous sloth. The\nlast verse we have quoted, about Israel's complacency and pride, is\nfollowed by this terrible one: _I shall be_[717] _to them like a\nlion, like a leopard I shall leap_[718] _upon the way. I will meet\nthem as a bear bereft_ of her cubs, _that I may tear the caul of\ntheir heart, that I may devour them there like a lion: the wild beast\nshall rend them._[719] This means that into Israel's insensibility\nto Himself God must break with facts, with wounds, with horrors they\ncannot evade. Till He so acts, their own efforts, _then shall we know\nif we hunt up to know_,[720] and their assurance, _My God, we do know\nThee_,[721] are very vain. Hosea did not speak for nothing. Events\nwere about to happen more momentous than even the Exodus and the\nConquest of the Land. By 734 the Assyrians had depopulated Gilead and\nGalilee; in 725 the capital itself was invested, and by 721 the whole\nnation carried into captivity. God had made Himself known.\n\nWe are already aware, however, that Hosea did not count this as God's\nfinal revelation to His people. Doom is not doom to him, as it was\nto Amos, but discipline; and God withdraws His people from their\nfascinating land only that He may have them more closely to Himself. He\nwill bring His Bride into the wilderness again, the wilderness where\nthey first met, and there, when her soul is tender and her stupid heart\nbroken, He will plant in her again the seeds of His knowledge and His\nlove. The passages which describe this are among the most beautiful of\nthe book. They tell us of no arbitrary conquest of Israel by Jehovah,\nof no magic and sudden transformation. They describe a process as\nnatural and gentle as a human wooing; they use, as we have seen, the\nvery terms of this: _I will woo her, bring her into the wilderness,\nand speak home to her heart.... And it shall be in that day that thou\nshalt call Me, My husband, ... and I will betroth thee to Me for ever\nin righteousness and in justice, and in leal love and in mercies and in\nfaithfulness; and thou shalt know Jehovah._[722]\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[663] i. 2.\n\n[664] iv. 6.\n\n[665] iv. 1.\n\n[666] v. 4.\n\n[667] ii. 10.\n\n[668] xi. 3.\n\n[669] iv. 6.\n\n[670] vi. 6.\n\n[671] ii. 22.\n\n[672] viii. 2.\n\n[673] \u05d9\u05d3\u05e2.\n\n[674] The Latin _videre_, _scire_, _noscere_, _cognoscere_,\n_intelligere_, _sapere_ and _peritus esse_.\n\n[675] Cf. the Greek \u03bf\u1f30\u03b4\u03b1 from \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n[676] vi. 9.\n\n[677] See above, pp. 258, 275; and below, p. 323.\n\n[678] viii. 5: cf. xxix. 3 (Eng. 4), _Jehovah did not give you a\nheart to know_.\n\n[679] Job xix. 13: still more close, of course, the intimacy between\nthe sexes for which the verb is so often used in the Old Testament.\n\n[680] xix. 25: cf. Gen. xx. 6.\n\n[681] viii. 9.\n\n[682] viii. 5: cf. Hosea ix. 7.\n\n[683] ix. 21.\n\n[684] 1 Sam. ii. 12. A similar meaning is probably to be attached to\nthe word in Gen. xxxix. 6: Potiphar _had no thought_ or _care for\nanything_ that was in Joseph's hand. Cf. Prov. ix. 13; xxvii. 23; Job\nxxxv. 15.\n\n[685] Gen. iii. 7.\n\n[686] Gen. iii. 5; Isa. vii. 15, etc.\n\n[687] iv. 14, \u05dc\u05d0\u05be\u05d9\u05d1\u05d9\u05df \u05e2\u05dd: if the original meaning of \u05d1\u05d9\u05df be to _get\nbetween_, _see through_ or _into_, so _discriminate_, _understand_,\nthen intelligence is its etymological equivalent.\n\n[688] vii. 11. See above, p. 321, _n._ 4.\n\n[689] vii. 9.\n\n[690] iv. 1.\n\n[691] v. 4.\n\n[692] For exposition of this chapter see above, pp. 256 ff.\n\n[693] iv. 11, 12, LXX.\n\n[694] iv. 14 f. See above, pp. 258 f.\n\n[695] vii. _passim_.\n\n[696] iv. 4-9. Above, pp. 257 f.\n\n[697] vi. 1 ff. See above, pp. 263 ff.\n\n[698] vi. 4.\n\n[699] iv. 6. See above, p. 257.\n\n[700] See above, pp. 97 f. On the other doubtful phrase, viii.\n12--literally _I write multitudes of My Torah, as a stranger they\nhave reckoned it_--no argument can be built; for even if we take the\nfirst clause as conditional and render, _Though I wrote multitudes\nof My Tor\u00f4th, yet as those of a stranger they would regard them_,\nthat would not necessarily mean that no Tor\u00f4th of Jehovah were yet\nwritten, but, on the contrary, might equally well imply that some at\nleast had been written.\n\n[701] Or _was overcome_.\n\n[702] xii. 4-6. See above, p. 302. LXX. reads _they supplicated Me\n... they found Me ... He spoke with them_. Many propose to read the\nlast clause _with him_. The passage is obscure. Note the order of the\nevents--the wrestling at Peniel, the revelation at Bethel, then in the\nsubsequent passage the flight to Aram. This however does not prove that\nin Hosea's information the last happened after the two first.\n\n[703] \u05e9\u05c1\u05d3\u05d4, _field_, here used in its political sense: cf. _Hist.\nGeog._, p. 79. Our word _country_, now meaning territory and now the\nrural as opposed to the urban districts, is strictly analogous to the\nHebrew _field_.\n\n[704] xii. 13, 14.\n\n[705] _A youth._\n\n[706] LXX., followed by many critics, _his sons_. But _My son_ is a\nbetter parallel to _young_ in the preceding clause. Or trans.: _to be\nMy son_.\n\n[707] So LXX. See p. 293.\n\n[708] So rightly LXX.\n\n[709] xi. 1-3.\n\n[710] ix. 10.\n\n[711] xiii. 4-6.\n\n[712] xii. 10. Other references to the ancient history are the story\nof Gibeah and the Valley of Achor.\n\n[713] ii. 10.\n\n[714] See above, p. 302.\n\n[715] iv. 6.\n\n[716] xiii. 5.\n\n[717] With Wellhausen read \u05d0\u05b6\u05d4\u05b0\u05d9\u05b6\u05d4 for \u05d5\u05b8\u05d0\u05b1\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9.\n\n[718] See above, p. 305, _n._ 4.\n\n[719] xiii. 7 ff.\n\n[720] vi. 3.\n\n[721] viii. 2.\n\n[722] i. 16, 18, 21, 22.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXII\n\n _REPENTANCE_\n\n HOSEA _passim_.\n\n\nIf we keep in mind what Hosea meant by knowledge--a new impression\nof facts implying a change both of temper and of conduct--we shall\nfeel how natural it is to pass at once from his doctrine of knowledge\nto his doctrine of repentance. Hosea may be accurately styled the\nfirst preacher of repentance yet so thoroughly did he deal with this\nsubject of eternal interest to the human heart, that between him and\nourselves almost no teacher has increased the insight with which it\nhas been examined, or the passion with which it ought to be enforced.\n\nOne thing we must hold clear from the outset. To us repentance is\nintelligible only in the individual. There is no motion of the heart\nwhich more clearly derives its validity from its personal character.\nRepentance is the conscience, the feeling, the resolution of a man\nby himself and for himself--\"_I_ will arise and go to my Father.\"\nYet it is not to the individual that Hosea directs his passionate\nappeals. For him and his age the religious unit was not the Israelite\nbut Israel. God had called and covenanted with the nation as a\nwhole; He had revealed Himself through their historical fortunes and\ninstitutions. His grace was shown in their succour and guidance as\na people; His last judgment was threatened in their destruction as a\nstate. So similarly, when by Hosea God calls to repentance, it is the\nwhole nation whom He addresses.\n\nAt the same time we must remember those qualifications which we\nadduced with regard to Hosea's doctrine of the nation's knowledge of\nGod.[723] They affect also his doctrine of the national repentance.\nHosea's experience of Israel had been preceded by his experience\nof an Israelite. For years the prophet had carried on his anxious\nheart a single human character--lived with her, travailed for her,\npardoned and redeemed her. As we felt that this long cure of a soul\nmust have helped Hosea to his very spiritual sense of the knowledge\nof God, so now we may justly assume that the same cannot have been\nwithout effect upon his very personal teaching about repentance. But\nwith his experience of Gomer, there conspired also his intense love\nfor Israel. A warm patriotism necessarily personifies its object. To\nthe passionate lover of his people, their figure rises up one and\nindividual--his mother, his lover, his wife. Now no man ever loved\nhis people more intimately or more tenderly than Hosea loved Israel.\nThe people were not only dear to him, because he was their son,\nbut dear and vivid also for their loneliness and their distinction\namong the peoples of the earth, and for their long experience as the\nintimate of the God of grace and lovingkindness. God had chosen this\nIsrael as His Bride; and the remembrance of the unique endowment\nand lonely destiny stimulated Hosea's imagination in the work of\npersonifying and individualising his people. He treats Israel with\nthe tenderness and particularity with which the Shepherd, leaving\nthe ninety and nine in the wilderness, seeks till He find it the one\nlost lamb. His analysis of his fickle generation's efforts to repent,\nof their motives in turning to God, and of their failures, is as\ninward and definite as if it were a single heart he were dissecting.\nCenturies have passed; the individual has displaced the nation;\nthe experience of the human heart has been infinitely increased,\nand prophecy and all preaching has grown more and more personal.\nYet it has scarcely ever been found either necessary to add to the\nterms which Hosea used for repentance, or possible to go deeper in\nanalysing the processes which these denote.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHosea's most simple definition of repentance is that _of returning unto\nGod_. For _turning_ and _re-turning_ the Hebrew language has only one\nverb--sh\u00fbbh. In the Book of Hosea there are instances in which it is\nemployed in the former sense;[724] but, even apart from its use for\nrepentance, the verb usually means to return. Thus the wandering wife\nin the second chapter says, _I will return to my former husband_;[725]\nand in the threat of judgment it is said, _Ephraim will return to\nEgypt_.[726] Similar is the sense in the phrases _His deeds will I turn\nback upon him_[727] and _I will not turn back to destroy Ephraim_.[728]\nThe usual meaning of the verb is therefore, not merely to turn or\nchange, but to turn right round, to turn back and home.[729] This is\nobviously the force of its employment to express repentance. For this\npurpose Hosea very seldom uses it alone.[730] He generally adds either\nthe name by which God had always been known, Jehovah,[731] or the\ndesignation of Him, as _their own God_.[732]\n\nWe must emphasise this point if we would appreciate the thoroughness\nof our prophet's doctrine, and its harmony with the preaching of the\nNew Testament. To Hosea repentance is no mere change in the direction\nof one's life. It is a turning back upon one's self, a retracing of\none's footsteps, a confession and acknowledgment of what one has\nabandoned. It is a coming back and a coming home to God, exactly as\nJesus Himself has described in the Parable of the Prodigal. As Hosea\nagain and again affirms, the Return to God, like the New Testament\nMetanoia, is the effect of new knowledge; but the new knowledge is\nnot of new facts--it is of facts which have been present for a long\ntime and which ought to have been appreciated before.\n\nOf these facts Hosea describes three kinds: the nation's misery, the\nunspeakable grace of their God, and their great guilt in turning from\nHim. Again it is as in the case of the prodigal: his hunger, his\nfather, and his cry, \"I have sinned against heaven and in thy sight.\"\n\nWe have already felt the pathos of those passages in which Hosea\ndescribes the misery and the decay of Israel, the unprofitableness\nand shame of all their restless traffic with other gods and alien\nempires. The state is rotten;[733] anarchy prevails.[734] The\nnational vitality is lessened: _Ephraim hath grey hairs_.[735] Power\nof birth and begetting have gone; the universal unchastity causes the\npopulation to diminish: _their glory flieth away like a bird_.[736]\nThe presents to Egypt,[737] the tribute to Assyria, drain the wealth\nof the people: _strangers devour his strength_.[738] The prodigal\nIsrael has his far-off country where he spends his substance among\nstrangers. It is in this connection that we must take the repeated\nverse: _the pride of Israel testifieth to his face_.[739] We have\nseen[740] the impossibility of the usual exegesis of these words,\nthat by _the Pride of Israel_ Hosea means Jehovah; the word \"pride\"\nis probably to be taken in the sense in which Amos employs it of the\nexuberance and arrogance of Israel's civilisation. If we are right,\nthen Hosea describes a very subtle symptom of the moral awakening\nwhether of the individual or of a community. The conscience of many\na man, of many a kingdom, has been reached only through their pride.\nPride is the last nerve which comfort and habit leave quick; and\nwhen summons to a man's better nature fail, it is still possible in\nmost cases to touch his pride with the presentation of the facts\nof his decadence. This is probably what Hosea means. Israel's\nprestige suffers. The civilisation of which they are proud has its\nopen wounds. Their politicians are the sport of Egypt;[741] their\nwealth, the very gold of their Temple, is lifted by Assyria.[742]\nThe nerve of pride was also touched in the prodigal: \"How many hired\nservants of my father have enough and to spare, while I perish\nwith hunger.\" Yet, unlike him, this prodigal son of God will not\ntherefore return.[743] Though there are grey hairs upon him, though\nstrangers devour his strength, _he knoweth it not_; of him it cannot\nbe said that \"he has come to himself.\" And that is why the prophet\nthreatens the further discipline of actual exile from the land and\nits fruits,[744] of bitter bread[745] and poverty[746] on an unclean\nsoil. Israel must also eat husks and feed with swine before he arises\nand _returns to his God_.\n\nBut misery alone never led either man or nation to repentance: the\nsorrow of this world worketh only death. Repentance is the return to\nGod; and it is the awakening to the truth about God, to the facts of\nHis nature and His grace, which alone makes repentance possible. No\nman's doctrine of repentance is intelligible without his doctrine\nof God; and it is because Hosea's doctrine of God is so rich, so\nfair and so tender, that his doctrine of repentance is so full and\ngracious. Here we see the difference between him and Amos. Amos\nhad also used the phrase with frequency; again and again he had\nappealed to the people to seek God and to return to God.[747] But\nfrom Amos it went forth only as a pursuing voice, a voice crying\nin the wilderness. Hosea lets loose behind it a heart, plies the\npeople with gracious thoughts of God, and brings about them, not the\nvoices only, but the atmosphere, of love. _I will be as the dew unto\nIsrael_, promises the Most High; but He is before His promise. The\nchapters of Hosea are drenched with the dew of God's mercy, of which\nno drop falls on those of Amos, but there God is rather the roar\nas of a lion, the flash as of lightning. Both prophets bid Israel\nturn to God; but Amos means by that, to justice, truth and purity,\nwhile Hosea describes a husband, a father, long-suffering and full\nof mercy. \"I bid you come back,\" cries Amos. But Hosea pleads, \"If\nonly you were aware of what God is, you would come back.\" \"Come back\nto God and live,\" cries Amos; but Hosea, \"Come back to God, for He\nis Love.\" Amos calls, \"Come back at once, for there is but little\ntime left till God must visit you in judgment\"; but Hosea, \"Come\nback at once, for God has loved you so long and so kindly.\" Amos\ncries, \"Turn, for in front of you is destruction\"; but Hosea, \"Turn,\nfor behind you is God.\" And that is why all Hosea's preaching of\nrepentance is so evangelical. \"I will arise and go _to my Father_.\"\n\nBut the _third_ element of the new knowledge which means repentance is\nthe conscience of guilt. _My Father, I have sinned._ On this point it\nmight be averred that the teaching of Hosea is less spiritual than that\nof later prophets in Israel, and that here at last he comes short of\nthe evangelical inwardness of the New Testament. There is truth in the\ncharge; and here perhaps we feel most the defects of his standpoint,\nas one who appeals, not to the individual, but to the nation as a\nwhole. Hosea's treatment of the sense of guilt cannot be so spiritual\nas that, say, of the fifty-first Psalm. But, at least, he is not\nsatisfied to exhaust it by the very thorough exposure which he gives\nus of the social sins of his day, and of their terrible results. He,\ntoo, understands what is meant by a conscience of sin. He has called\nIsrael's iniquity harlotry, unfaithfulness to God; and in a passage\nof equal insight and beauty of expression he points out that in the\nservice of the Ba'alim Jehovah's people can never feel anything but a\nharlot's shame and bitter memories of the better past.\n\n_Rejoice not, O Israel, to the pitch of rapture like the heathen:\nfor thou hast played the harlot from thine own God; 'tis hire\nthou hast loved on all threshing-floors. Floor and vat shall not\nacknowledge them; the new wine shall play them false._[748] Mere\nchildren of nature may abandon themselves to the riotous joy of\nharvest and vintage festivals, for they have never known other gods\nthan are suitably worshipped by these orgies. But Israel has a\npast--the memory of a holier God, the conscience of having deserted\nHim for material gifts. With such a conscience she can never enjoy\nthe latter; as Hosea puts it, they will not _acknowledge_ or _take\nto_[749] her. Here there is an instinct of the profound truth, that\neven in the fulness of life conscience is punishment; by itself the\nsense of guilt is judgment.\n\nBut Hosea does not attack the service of strange gods only because\nit is unfaithfulness to Jehovah, but also because, as the worship of\nimages, it is a senseless stupidity utterly inconsistent with that\nspiritual discernment of which repentance so largely consists. And\nwith the worship of heathen idols Hosea equally condemns the worship\nof Jehovah under the form of images.\n\nHosea was the first in Israel to lead the attack upon the idols.\nElijah had assaulted the worship of a foreign god, but neither he nor\nElisha nor Amos condemned the worship of Israel's own God under the\nform of a calf. Indeed Amos, except in one doubtful passage,[750]\nnever at all attacks idols or false gods. The reason is very obvious.\nAmos and Elijah were concerned only with the proclamation of God as\njustice and purity: and to the moral aspects of religion the question\nof idolatry is not relevant; the two things do not come directly into\ncollision. But Hosea had deeper and more wide views of God, with which\nidolatry came into conflict at a hundred points. We know what Hosea's\n_knowledge of God_ was--how spiritual, how extensive--and we can\nappreciate how incongruous idolatry must have appeared against it. We\nare prepared to find him treating the images, whether of the Ba'alim\nor of Jehovah, with that fine scorn which a passionate monotheism,\njustly conscious of its intellectual superiority, has ever passed upon\nthe idolatry even of civilisations in other respects higher than its\nown. To Hosea the idol is an _'eseb, a made thing_.[751] It is made\nof the very silver and gold with which Jehovah Himself had endowed\nthe people.[752] It is made only _to be cut off_[753] by the first\ninvader! Chiefly, however, does Hosea's scorn fall upon the image under\nwhich Jehovah Himself was worshipped. _Thy Calf, O Samaria!_[754] he\ncontemptuously calls it. _From Israel is it also_, as much as the\nBa'alim. _A workman made it, and no god is it: chips shall the Calf of\nSamaria become!_ In another place he mimics the _anxiety of Samaria\nfor their Calf; his people mourn for him, and his priestlings writhe\nfor his glory_, why?--_because it is going into exile_:[755] the gold\nthat covers him shall be stripped for the tribute to Assyria. And\nonce more: _They continue to sin; they make them a smelting of their\nsilver, idols after their own modelling, smith's work all of it. To\nthese things they speak! Sacrificing men_ actually _kiss calves!_[756]\nAll this is in the same vein of satire which we find grown to such\nbrilliance in the great Prophet of the Exile.[757] Hosea was the first\nin whom it sparkled; and it was due to his conception of _the knowledge\nof God_. Its relevancy to his doctrine of repentance is this, that so\nspiritual an apprehension of God as repentance implies, so complete a\n_metanoia_ or _change of mind_, is intellectually incompatible with\nidolatry. You cannot speak of repentance to men who _kiss calves_ and\nworship blocks of wood. Hence he says: _Ephraim is wedded to idols:\nleave him alone_.[758]\n\nThere was more than idolatry, however, in the way of Israel's\nrepentance. The whole of the national worship was an obstacle. Its\nformalism and its easy and mechanical methods of _turning to God_\ndisguised the need of that moral discipline and change of heart,\nwithout which no repentance can be genuine. Amos had contrasted the\nritualism of the time with the duty of civic justice and the service\nof the poor:[759] Hosea opposes to it leal love and the knowledge of\nGod. _I will have leal love and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of\nGod rather than burnt-offerings._[760] It is characteristic of Hosea\nto class sacrifices with idols. Both are senseless and inarticulate,\nincapable of expressing or of answering the deep feelings of the\nheart. True repentance, on the contrary, is rational, articulate,\ndefinite. _Take with you words_, says Hosea, _and_ so _return to\nJehovah_.[761]\n\nTo us who, after twenty-five more centuries of talk, know painfully\nhow words may be abused, it is strange to find them enforced as\nthe tokens of sincerity. But let us consider against what the\nprophet enforces them. Against the _kissing of calves_ and such\nmummery--worship of images that neither hear nor speak. Let us\nremember the inarticulateness of ritualism, how it stifles rather\nthan utters the feelings of the heart. Let us imagine the dead\nroutine of the legal sacrifices, their original symbolism worn\nbare, bringing forward to the young hearts of new generations no\ninterpretation of their ancient and distorted details, reducing those\nwho perform them to irrational machines like themselves. Then let\nus remember how our own Reformers had to grapple with the same hard\nmechanism in the worship of their time, and how they bade the heart\nof every worshipper _speak_--speak for itself to God with rational\nand sincere words. So in place of the frozen ritualism of the Church\nthere broke forth from all lands of the Reformation, as though it\nwere birds in springtime, a great burst of hymns and prayers, with\nthe clear notes of the Gospel in the common tongue. So intolerable\nwas the memory of what had been, that it was even enacted that\nhenceforth no sacrament should be dispensed but the Word should be\ngiven to the people along with it. If we keep all these things in\nmind, we shall know what Hosea means when he says to Israel in their\npenitence, _Take with you words_.\n\nNo one, however, was more conscious of the danger of words. Upon\nthe lips of the people Hosea has placed a confession of repentance,\nwhich, so far as the words go, could not be more musical or\npathetic.[762] In every Christian language it has been paraphrased to\nan exquisite confessional hymn. But Hosea describes it as rejected.\nIts words are too easy; its thoughts of God and of His power to save\nare too facile. Repentance, it is true, starts from faith in the\nmercy of God, for without this there were only despair. Nevertheless\nin all true penitence there is despair. Genuine sorrow for sin\nincludes a feeling of the irreparableness of the past, and the true\npenitent as he casts himself upon God does not dare to feel that he\never can be the same again. _I am no more worthy to be called Thy\nson: make me as one of Thy hired servants._ Such necessary thoughts\nas these Israel does not mingle with her prayer. _Come and let us\nreturn to Jehovah, for He hath torn_ only _that He may heal, and\nsmitten_ only _that He may bind up. He will revive us again in a\ncouple of days, on the third day raise us up, that we may live before\nHim. Then shall we know if we hunt up to know the Lord. As soon\nas we seek Him we shall find Him: and He shall come upon us like\nwinter-rain, and like the spring-rain pouring on the land._ This\nis too facile, too shallow. No wonder that God despairs of such a\npeople. _What am I to make of thee, Ephraim?_[763]\n\nAnother familiar passage, the Parable of the Heifer, describes the\nsame ambition to reach spiritual results without spiritual processes.\n_Ephraim is a broken-in heifer--one that loveth to tread_ out the\ncorn. _But I will pass upon her goodly neck. I will give Ephraim a\nyoke, Judah must plough. Jacob must harrow for himself._[764] Cattle,\nbeing unmuzzled by law[765] at threshing time, loved this best of\nall their year's work. Yet to reach it they must first go through\nthe harder and unrewarded trials of ploughing and harrowing. Like a\nheifer, then, which loved harvest only, Israel would spring at the\nrewards of penitence, the peaceable fruits of righteousness, without\ngoing through the discipline and chastisement which alone yield them.\nRepentance is no mere turning or even re-turning. It is a deep and\nan ethical process--the breaking up of fallow ground, the labour and\nlong expectation of the sower, the seeking and waiting for Jehovah\ntill Himself send the rain. _Sow to yourselves in righteousness;\nreap in proportion to love_ (the love you have sown), _break up your\nfallow ground: for it is time to seek Jehovah, until He come and rain\nrighteousness upon us_.[766]\n\nA repentance so thorough as this cannot but result in the most clear\nand steadfast manner of life. Truly it is a returning not by oneself,\nbut _a returning by God_, and it leads to the _keeping of leal love\nand justice, and waiting upon God continually_.[767]\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[723] See above, p. 320.\n\n[724] vii. 16, _They turn, but not upwards_; xiv. 5, _Mine anger is\nturned away_.\n\n[725] ii. 9.\n\n[726] viii. 13; ix. 3; xi. 5.\n\n[727] iv. 9: cf. xii. 3, 15.\n\n[728] xi. 9: cf. ii. 11.\n\n[729] This may be further seen in the very common phrase \u05e9\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea \u05e9\u05d5\u05d1\n\u05e2\u05de\u05d9, _to turn again_ the captivity of My people (see Hosea vi. 11);\nor in the use of \u05e9\u05d5\u05d1 in xiv. 8, where it has the force, auxiliary\nto the other verb in the clause, of repeating or coming back to do\na thing. But the text here needs emendation: cf. above, p. 315. Cf.\nAmos' use of the Hiphil form to _draw back_, _withdraw_, i. 3, 6, 9,\n11, 13; ii. 1, 4, 6.\n\n[730] Cf. xi. 5, _they refused to return_.\n\n[731] vi. 1, _Come and let us return to Jehovah_; vii. 10, _They did\nnot return to Jehovah_; xiv. 2, 3, _Return, O Israel, to Jehovah_.\n\n[732] iii. 5, _They shall return and seek Jehovah their God_; v. 4,\n_Their deeds do not allow them to return to their God_.\n\n[733] v. 12, etc.\n\n[734] iv. 2 ff.; vi. 7 ff., etc.\n\n[735] vii. 7.\n\n[736] ix. 11 ff.\n\n[737] xii. 2.\n\n[738] vii. 7.\n\n[739] v. 5; vii. 10.\n\n[740] See above, p. 261.\n\n[741] vii. 16.\n\n[742] x. 5.\n\n[743] vii. 10.\n\n[744] ii. 16, etc.; ix. 2 ff., etc.\n\n[745] ix. 4.\n\n[746] xii. 10.\n\n[747] iv. 6, 8, 9, 10, 11.\n\n[748] ix. 1. See above, p. 279.\n\n[749] See above, p. 279, _n._ 4.\n\n[750] v. 26.\n\n[751] \u05e2\u05b5\u05e6\u05b6\u05d1 from \u05e2\u05b8\u05e6\u05b7\u05d1, which in Job x. 8 is parallel to \u05e2\u05e9\u05d4.\n\n[752] ii. 8.\n\n[753] viii. 4.\n\n[754] viii. 5.\n\n[755] x. 5.\n\n[756] xiii. 2.\n\n[757] Isa. xli. ff.\n\n[758] iv. 17.\n\n[759] Amos v.\n\n[760] vi. 6.\n\n[761] xiv. 2. Perhaps the curious expression at the close of\nthe verse, _so will we render the calves of our lips_, or (as a\nvariant reading gives) _fruit of our lips_, has the same intention.\nArticulate confession (or vows), these are the sacrifices, _the\ncalves_, which are acceptable to God.\n\n[762] vi. 1-4.\n\n[763] For the reasons for this interpretation see above, pp. 263 ff.\n\n[764] x. 11.\n\n[765] See above, p. 288.\n\n[766] x. 12.\n\n[767] xii. 7.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIII\n\n _THE SIN AGAINST LOVE_\n\n HOSEA i.-iii.; iv. 11 ff.; ix. 10 ff.; xi. 8 f.\n\n\nThe Love of God is a terrible thing--that is the last lesson of the\nBook of Hosea. _My God will cast them away._[768]\n\n_My God_--let us remember the right which Hosea had to use these\nwords. Of all prophets he was the first to break into the full\naspect of the Divine Mercy--to learn and to proclaim that God is\nLove. But he was worthy to do so, by the patient love of his own\nheart towards another who for years had outraged all his trust and\ntenderness. He had loved, believed and been betrayed; pardoned and\nwaited and yearned, and sorrowed and pardoned again. It is in this\nlong-suffering that his breast beats upon the breast of God with\nthe cry _My God_. As he had loved Gomer, so had God loved Israel,\npast hope, against hate, through ages of ingratitude and apostasy.\nQuivering with his own pain, Hosea has exhausted all human care\nand affection for figures to express the Divine tenderness, and he\ndeclares God's love to be deeper than all the passion of men, and\nbroader than all their patience: _How can I give thee up, Ephraim?\nHow can I let thee go, Israel? I will not execute the fierceness of\nMine anger. For I am God, and not man._ And yet, like poor human\naffection, this Love of God, too, confesses its failure--_My God\nshall cast them away._ It is God's sentence of relinquishment upon\nthose who sin against His Love, but the poor human lips which deliver\nit quiver with an agony of their own, and here, as more explicitly in\ntwenty other passages of the book, declare it to be equally the doom\nof those who outrage the love of their fellow men and women.\n\nWe have heard it said: \"The lives of men are never the same after\nthey have loved; if they are not better they must be worse.\" \"Be\nafraid of the love that loves you: it is either your heaven or your\nhell.\" \"All the discipline of men springs from their love--if they\ntake it not so, then all their sorrow must spring from the same\nsource.\" \"There is a depth of sorrow, which can only be known to\na soul that has loved the most perfect thing and beholds itself\nfallen.\" These things are true of the Love, both of our brother and\nof our God. And the eternal interest of the life of Hosea is that he\nlearned how, for strength and weakness, for better for worse, our\nhuman and our Divine loves are inseparably joined.\n\n\n I.\n\nMost men learn that love is inseparable from pain where Hosea learned\nit--at home. There it is that we are all reminded that when love\nis strongest she feels her weakness most. For the anguish which\nlove must bear, as it were from the foundation of the world, is the\ncontradiction at her heart between the largeness of her wishes and\nthe littleness of her power to realise them. A mother feels it,\nbending over the bed of her child, when its body is racked with\npain or its breath spent with coughing. So great is the feeling of\nher love that it ought to do something, that she will actually feel\nherself cruel because nothing can be done. Let the sick-bed become\nthe beach of death, and she must feel the helplessness and the\nanguish still more as the dear life is now plucked from her and now\ntossed back by the mocking waves, and then drawn slowly out to sea\nupon the ebb from which there is no returning.\n\nBut the pain which disease and death thus cause to love is nothing to\nthe agony that Sin inflicts when he takes the game into his unclean\nhands. We know what pain love brings, if our love be a fair face and\nfresh body in which Death brands his sores while we stand by, as if\nwith arms bound. But what if our love be a childlike heart, and a\nfrank expression and honest eyes, and a clean and clever mind. Our\npowerlessness is just as great and infinitely more tormented when Sin\ncomes by and casts his shadow over these. Ah, that is Love's greatest\ntorment when her children, who have run from her to the bosom of sin,\nlook back and their eyes are changed! That is the greatest torment\nof Love--to pour herself without avail into one of those careless\nnatures which seem capacious and receptive, yet never fill with\nlove, for there is a crack and a leak at the bottom of them. The\nfields where Love suffers her sorest defeats are not the sick-bed\nand not death's margin, not the cold lips and sealed eyes kissed\nwithout response; but the changed eyes of children, and the breaking\nof \"the full-orbed face,\" and the darkening look of growing sons\nand daughters, and the home the first time the unclean laugh breaks\nacross it. To watch, though unable to soothe, a dear body racked with\npain, is peace beside the awful vigil of watching a soul shrink and\nblacken with vice, and your love unable to redeem it.\n\nSuch a clinical study Hosea endured for years. The prophet of God, we\nare told, brought a dead child to life by taking him in his arms and\nkissing him. But Hosea with all his love could not make Gomer a true\nwhole wife again. Love had no power on this woman--no power even at\nthe merciful call to make all things new. Hosea, who had once placed\nall hope in tenderness, had to admit that Love's moral power is not\nabsolute. Love may retire defeated from the highest issues of life.\nSin may conquer Love.\n\nYet it is in this his triumph that Sin must feel the ultimate\nrevenge. When a man has conquered this weak thing and beaten her down\nbeneath his feet, God speaks the sentence of abandonment.\n\nThere is enough of the whipped dog in all of us to make us dread\npenalty when we come into conflict with the strong things of\nlife. But it takes us all our days to learn that there is far\nmore condemnation to them who offend the weak things of life, and\nparticularly the weakest of all, its love. It was on sins against the\nweak that Christ passed His sternest judgments: _Woe unto him that\noffends one of these little ones; it were better for him that he had\nnever been born._ God's little ones are not only little children,\nbut all things which, like little children, have only love for their\nstrength. They are pure and loving men and women--men with no weapon\nbut their love, women with no shield but their trust. They are the\ninnocent affections of our own hearts--the memories of our childhood,\nthe ideals of our youth, the prayers of our parents, the faith in\nus of our friends. These are the little ones of whom Christ spake,\nthat he who sins against them had better never have been born. Often\nmay the dear solicitudes of home, a father's counsels, a mother's\nprayers, seem foolish things against the challenges of a world,\ncalling us to play the man and do as it does; often may the vows and\nenthusiasms of boyhood seem impertinent against the temptations which\nare so necessary to manhood: yet let us be true to the weak, for if\nwe betray them, we betray our own souls. We may sin against law and\nmaim or mutilate ourselves, but to sin against love is to be cast out\nof life altogether. He who violates the purity of the love with which\nGod has filled his heart, he who abuses the love God has sent to meet\nhim in his opening manhood, he who slights any of the affections,\nwhether they be of man or woman, of young or of old, which God lays\nupon us as the most powerful redemptive forces of our life, next to\nthat of His dear Son--he sinneth against his own soul, and it is of\nsuch that Hosea spake: _My God will cast them away_.\n\nWe talk of breaking law: we can only break ourselves against it. But\nif we sin against Love, we do destroy her; we take from her the power\nto redeem and sanctify us. Though in their youth men think Love a\nquick and careless thing--a servant always at their side, a winged\nmessenger easy of despatch--let them know that every time they send\nher on an evil errand she returns with heavier feet and broken wings.\nWhen they make her a pander they kill her outright. When she is no\nmore they waken to that which Gomer came to know, that love abused is\nlove lost, and love lost means Hell.\n\n\n II.\n\nThis, however, is only the margin from which Hosea beholds an\nabandonment still deeper. All that has been said of human love and\nthe penalty of outraging it is equally true of the Divine love and\nthe sin against that.\n\nThe love of God has the same weakness which we have seen in the love\nof man. It, too, may fail to redeem; it, too, has stood defeated on\nsome of the highest moral battle-fields of life. God Himself has\nsuffered anguish and rejection from sinful men. \"Herein,\" says a\ntheologian, \"is the mystery of this love, ... that God can never by\nHis Almighty Power compel that which is the very highest gift in the\nlife of His creatures--love to Himself, but that He receives it as\nthe free gift of His creatures, and that He is only able to allow men\nto give it to Him in a free act of their own will.\" So Hosea also\nhas told us how God does not compel, but allure or _woo_, the sinful\nback to Himself. And it is the deepest anguish of the prophet's\nheart, that this free grace of God may fail through man's apathy\nor insincerity. The anguish appears in those frequent antitheses\nin which his torn heart reflects herself in the style of his\ndiscourse. _I have redeemed them--yet have they spoken lies against\nMe._[769] _I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness--they went to\nBa'al-Peor._[770] _When Israel was a child, then I loved him ... but\nthey sacrificed to Ba'alim._[771] _I taught Ephraim to walk, but they\nknew not that I healed them._[772] _How can I give thee up, Ephraim?\nhow can I let thee go, O Israel?... Ephraim compasseth Me with lies,\nand the house of Israel with deceit!_[773]\n\nWe fear to apply all that we know of the weakness of human love to\nthe love of God. Yet though He be God and not man, it was as man He\ncommended His love to us. He came nearest us, not in the thunders\nof Sinai, but in Him Who presented Himself to the world with the\ncaresses of a little child; Who met men with no angelic majesty\nor heavenly aureole, but whom when we saw we found nothing that\nwe should desire Him, His visage was so marred more than any man,\nand His form than the sons of men; Who came to His own and His own\nreceived Him not; Who, having loved His own that were in the world,\nloved them up to the end, and yet at the end was by them deserted and\nbetrayed,--it is of Him that Hosea prophetically says: _I drew them\nwith cords of a man and with bands of love_.\n\nWe are not bound to God by any unbreakable chain. The strands which\ndraw us upwards to God, to holiness and everlasting life, have the\nweakness of those which bind us to the earthly souls we love. It is\npossible for us to break them. We love Christ, not because He has\ncompelled us by any magic, irresistible influence to do so; but, as\nJohn in his great simplicity says, _We love Him because He first\nloved us_.\n\nNow this is surely the terror of God's love--that it can be resisted;\nthat even as it is manifest in Jesus Christ we men have the power,\nnot only to remain, as so many do, outside its scope, feeling it to\nbe far-off and vague, but having tasted it to fall away from it,\nhaving realised it to refuse it, having allowed it to begin its moral\npurposes in our lives to baffle and nullify these; to make the glory\nof Heaven absolutely ineffectual in our own characters; and to give\nour Saviour the anguish of rejection.\n\nGive Him the anguish, yet pass upon ourselves the doom! For, as I\nread the New Testament, the one unpardonable sin is the sin against\nour Blessed Redeemer's Love as it is brought home to the heart by\nthe power of the Holy Spirit. Every other sin is forgiven to men but\nto crucify afresh Him who loved us and gave Himself for us. The most\nterrible of His judgments is \"the wail of a heart wounded because\nits love has been despised\": _Jerusalem, Jerusalem! how often would\nI have gathered thy children as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye\nwould not. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate!_\n\nMen say they cannot believe in hell, because they cannot conceive how\nGod may sentence men to misery for the breaking of laws they were\nborn without power to keep. And one would agree with the inference,\nif God had done any such thing. But for them which are under the law\nand the sentence of death, Christ died once for all, that He might\nredeem them. Yet this does not make a hell less believable. When we\nsee how Almighty was that Love of God in Christ Jesus, lifting our\nwhole race and sending them forward with a freedom and a power of\ngrowth nothing else in history has won for them; when we prove again\nhow weak it is, so that it is possible for millions of characters\nthat have felt it to refuse its eternal influence for the sake of\nsome base and transient passion; nay, when _I myself_ know this power\nand this weakness of Christ's love, so that one day being loyal I\nam raised beyond the reach of fear and of doubt, beyond the desire\nof sin and the habit of evil, and the next day finds me capable\nof putting it aside in preference for some slight enjoyment or\nambition--then I know the peril and the terror of this love, that it\nmay be to a man either Heaven or Hell.\n\nBelieve then in hell, because you believe in the Love of God--not\nin a hell to which God condemns men of His will and pleasure, but a\nhell into which men cast themselves from the very face of His love\nin Jesus Christ. The place has been painted as a place of fires.\nBut when we contemplate that men come to it with the holiest flames\nin their nature quenched, we shall justly feel that it is rather a\ndreary waste of ash and cinder, strewn with snow--some ribbed and\nfrosted Arctic zone, silent in death, for there is no life there, and\nthere is no life there because there is no Love, and no Love because\nmen in rejecting or abusing her have slain their own power ever again\nto feel her presence.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[768] x. 17.\n\n[769] vii. 13.\n\n[770] ix. 10.\n\n[771] xi. 1, 2.\n\n[772] xi. 4.\n\n[773] xi. 8; xii. 1.\n\n\n\n\n _MICAH_\n\n\n\n\n \"But I am full of power by the Spirit of Jehovah\n To declare to Jacob his transgressions, and to Israel his\n sin.\"\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIV\n\n _THE BOOK OF MICAH_\n\n\nThe Book of Micah lies sixth of the Twelve Prophets in the Hebrew\nCanon, but in the order of the Septuagint third, following Amos and\nHosea. The latter arrangement was doubtless directed by the size of\nthe respective books;[774] in the case of Micah it has coincided with\nthe prophet's proper chronological position. Though his exact date be\nnot certain, he appears to have been a younger contemporary of Hosea,\nas Hosea was of Amos.\n\nThe book is not two-thirds the size of that of Amos, and about half\nthat of Hosea. It has been arranged in seven chapters, which follow,\nmore or less, a natural method of division.[775] They are usually\ngrouped in three sections, distinguishable from each other by their\nsubject-matter, by their temper and standpoint, and to a less degree\nby their literary form. They are A. Chaps. i.-iii.; B. Chaps. iv.,\nv.; C. Chaps, vi., vii.\n\nThere is no book of the Bible, as to the date of whose different\nparts there has been more discussion, especially within recent\nyears. The history of this is shortly as follows:--\n\n Tradition and the criticism of the early years of this century\n accepted the statement of the title, that the book was composed\n in the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah--that is, between\n 740 and 700 B.C. It was generally agreed that there were in it\n only traces of the first two reigns, but that the whole was put\n together before the fall of Samaria in 721.[776] Then Hitzig\n and Steiner dated chaps, iii.-vi. after 721; and Ewald denied\n that Micah could have given us chaps, vi., vii., and placed them\n under King Manasseh, _circa_ 690-640. Next Wellhausen[777] sought\n to prove that vii. 7-20 must be post-exilic. Stade[778] took a\n further step, and, on the ground that Micah himself could not\n have blunted or annulled his sharp pronouncements of doom, by the\n promises which chaps, iv. and v. contain, he withdrew these from\n the prophet and assigned them to the time of the Exile.[779] But\n the sufficiency of this argument was denied by Vatke.[780] Also\n in opposition to Stade, Kuenen[781] refused to believe that Micah\n could have been content with the announcement of the fall of\n Jerusalem as his last word, that therefore much of chaps, iv. and\n v. is probably from himself, but since their argument is obviously\n broken and confused, we must look in them for interpolations, and\n he decides that such are iv. 6-8, 11-13, and the working up of v.\n 9-14. The famous passage in iv. 1-4 may have been Micah's, but was\n probably added by another. Chaps, vi. and vii. were written under\n Manasseh by some of the persecuted adherents of Jehovah.\n\n We may next notice two critics who adopt an extremely\n conservative position. Von Ryssel,[782] as the result of a\n very thorough examination, declared that all the chapters were\n Micah's, even the much doubted ii. 12, 13, which have been\n placed by an editor of the book in the wrong position, and chap.\n vii. 7-20, which he agrees with Ewald can only date from the\n reign of Manasseh, Micah himself having lived long enough into\n that reign to write them himself. Another careful analysis by\n Elhorst[783] also reached the conclusion that the bulk of the\n book was authentic, but for his proof of this Elhorst requires a\n radical rearrangement of the verses, and that on grounds which\n do not always commend themselves. He holds chap. iv. 9-14 and v.\n 8 for post-exilic insertions. Driver[784] contributes a thorough\n examination of the book, and reaches the conclusions that ii. 12,\n 13, though obviously in their wrong place, need not be denied to\n Micah; that the difficulties of ascribing chaps, iv., v., to the\n prophet are not insuperable, nor is it even necessary to suppose\n in them interpolations. He agrees with Ewald as to the date of\n vi.-vii. 6, and, while holding that it is quite possible for\n Micah to have written them, thinks they are more probably due to\n another, though a confident conclusion is not to be achieved. As\n to vii. 7-20, he judges Wellhausen's inferences to be unnecessary.\n A prophet in Micah's or Manasseh's time may have thought\n destruction nearer than it actually proved to be, and, imagining\n it as already arrived, have put into the mouth of the people a\n confession suited to its circumstance. Wildeboer[785] goes further\n than Driver. He replies in detail to the arguments of Stade and\n Cornill, denies that the reasons for withdrawing so much from\n Micah are conclusive, and assigns to the prophet the whole book,\n with the exception of several interpolations.\n\nWe see, then, that all critics are practically agreed as to the\npresence of interpolations in the text, as well as to the occurrence\nof certain verses of the prophet out of their proper order. This\nindeed must be obvious to every careful reader as he notes the somewhat\nfrequent break in the logical sequence, especially of chaps, iv. and\nv. All critics, too, admit the authenticity of chaps, i.-iii., with\nthe possible exception of ii. 12, 13; while a majority hold that\nchaps, vi. and vii., whether by Micah or not, must be assigned to the\nreign of Manasseh. On the authenticity of chaps, iv. and v.--_minus_\ninterpolations--and of chaps, vi. and vii., opinion is divided; but we\nought not to overlook the remarkable fact that those who have recently\nwritten the fullest monographs on Micah[786] incline to believe in the\ngenuineness of the book as a whole.[787] We may now enter for ourselves\nupon the discussion of the various sections, but before we do so let\nus note how much of the controversy turns upon the general question,\nwhether after decisively predicting the overthrow of Jerusalem it was\npossible for Micah to add prophecies of her restoration. It will be\nremembered that we have had to discuss this same point with regard both\nto Amos and Hosea. In the case of the former we decided against the\nauthenticity of visions of a blessed future which now close his book;\nin the case of the latter we decided for the authenticity. What were\nour reasons for this difference? They were, that the closing vision of\nthe Book of Amos is not at all in harmony with the exclusively ethical\nspirit of the authentic prophecies; while the closing vision of the\nBook of Hosea is not only in language and in ethical temper thoroughly\nin harmony with the chapters which precede it, but in certain details\nhas been actually anticipated by these. Hosea, therefore, furnishes us\nwith the case of a prophet who, though he predicted the ruin of his\nimpenitent people (and that ruin was verified by events), also spoke of\nthe possibility of their restoration upon conditions in harmony with\nhis reasons for the inevitableness of their fall. And we saw, too, that\nthe hopeful visions of the future, though placed last in the collection\nof his prophecies, need not necessarily have been spoken last by the\nprophet, but stand where they do because they have an eternal spiritual\nvalidity for the remnant of Israel.[788] What was possible for Hosea is\nsurely possible for Micah. That promises come in his book, and closely\nafter the conclusive threats which he gave of the fall of Jerusalem,\ndoes not imply that originally he uttered them all in such close\nproximity. That indeed would have been impossible. But considering how\noften the political prospect in Israel changed during Micah's time, and\nhow far the city was in his day from her actual destruction--more than\na century distant--it seems to be improbable that he should not (in\nwhatever order) have uttered both threat and promise. And naturally,\nwhen his prophecies were arranged in permanent order, the promises\nwould be placed after the threats.[789]\n\n\n\n FIRST SECTION: CHAPS. I.-III.\n\nNo critic doubts the authenticity of the bulk of these chapters. The\nsole question at issue is the date or (possibly) the dates of them.\nOnly chap. ii. 12, 13, are generally regarded as out of place, where\nthey now stand.\n\nChap. i. trembles with the destruction of both Northern Israel and\nJudah--a destruction either very imminent or actually in the process\nof happening. The verses which deal with Samaria, 6 ff., do not\nsimply announce her inevitable ruin. They throb with the sense either\nthat this is immediate, or that it is going on, or that it has just\nbeen accomplished. The verbs suit each of these alternatives: _And I\nshall set_, or _am selling_, or _have set_, _Samaria for a ruin of\nthe field_, and so on. We may assign them to any time between 725\nB.C., the beginning of the siege of Samaria by Shalmaneser, and a\nyear or two after its destruction by Sargon in 721. Their intense\nfeeling seems to preclude the possibility of their having been\nwritten in the years to which some assign them, 705-700, or twenty\nyears after Samaria was actually overthrown.\n\nIn the next verses the prophet goes on to mourn the fact that the\naffliction of Samaria reaches even to the gate of Jerusalem, and he\nespecially singles out as partakers in the danger of Jerusalem a\nnumber of towns, most of which (so far as we can discern) lie not\nbetween Jerusalem and Samaria, but at the other corner of Judah, in\nthe Shephelah or out upon the Philistine plain.[790] This was the\nregion which Sennacherib invaded in 701, simultaneously with his\ndetachment of a corps to attack the capital; and accordingly we\nmight be shut up to affirm that this end of chap. i. dates from that\ninvasion, if no other explanation of the place-names were possible.\nBut another is possible. Micah himself belonged to one of these\nShephelah towns, Moresheth-Gath, and it is natural that, anticipating\nthe invasion of all Judah, after the fall of Samaria (as Isaiah[791]\nalso did), he should single out for mourning his own district of the\ncountry. This appears to be the most probable solution of a very\ndoubtful problem, and accordingly we may date the whole of chap.\ni. somewhere between 725 and 720 or 718. Let us remember that in\n719 Sargon marched past this very district of the Shephelah in his\ncampaign against Egypt, whom he defeated at Raphia.[792]\n\nOur conclusion is supported by chap. ii. Judah, though Jehovah be\nplanning evil against her, is in the full course of her ordinary\nsocial activities. The rich are absorbing the lands of the poor\n(vv. i. ff.): note the phrase _upon their beds_; it alone signifies\na time of security. The enemies of Israel are internal (8). The\npublic peace is broken by the lords of the land and men and women,\ndisposed to live quietly, are robbed (8 ff.). The false prophets\nhave sufficient signs of the times in their favour to regard Micah's\nthreats of destruction as calumnies (6). And although he regards\ndestruction as inevitable, it is not to be to-day; but _in that day_\n(4), viz. some still indefinite date in the future, the blow will\nfall and the nation's elegy be sung. On this chapter, then, there\nis no shadow of a foreign invader. We might assign it to the years\nof Jotham and Ahaz (under whose reigns the title of the book places\npart of the prophesying of Micah), but since there is no sense of a\ndouble kingdom, no distinction between Judah and Israel, it belongs\nmore probably to the years when all immediate danger from Assyria\nhad passed away, between Sargon's withdrawal from Raphia in 719\nand his invasion of Ashdod in 710, or between the latter date and\nSennacherib's accession in 705.\n\nChap. iii. contains three separate oracles, which exhibit a similar\nstate of affairs: the abuse of the common people by their chiefs and\nrulers, who are implied to be in full sense of power and security.\nThey have time to aggravate their doings (4); their doom is still\nfuture--_then at that time_ (_ib._). The bulk of the prophets\ndetermine their oracles by the amount men give them (5), another sign\nof security. Their doom is also future (6 f.). In the third of the\noracles the authorities of the land are in the undisturbed exercise\nof their judicial offices (9 f.), and the priests and prophets of\ntheir oracles (10), though all these professions practise only for\nbribe and reward. Jerusalem is still being built and embellished\n(10). But the prophet, not because there are political omens pointing\nto this, but simply in the force of his indignation at the sins of\nthe upper classes, prophesies the destruction of the capital (12). It\nis possible that these oracles of chap. iii. may be later than those\nof the previous chapters.[793]\n\n\n SECOND SECTION: CHAPS. IV., V.\n\nThis section of the book opens with two passages, verses 1-5 and verses\n6, 7, which there are serious objections against assigning to Micah.\n\n1. The first of these, 1-5, is the famous prophecy of the Mountain\nof the Lord's House, which is repeated in Isaiah ii. 2-5. Probably\nthe Book of Micah presents this to us in the more original form.[794]\nThe alternatives therefore are four: Micah was the author, and Isaiah\nborrowed from him; or both borrowed from an earlier source;[795] or\nthe oracle is authentic in Micah, and has been inserted by a later\neditor in Isaiah; or it has been inserted by later editors in both\nMicah and Isaiah.\n\nThe last of these conclusions is required by the arguments first\nstated by Stade and Hackmann, and then elaborated, in a very strong\npiece of reasoning, by Cheyne. Hackmann, after marking the want of\nconnection with the previous chapter, alleges the keynotes of the\npassage to be three: that it is not the arbitration of Jehovah,[796]\nbut His sovereignty over foreign nations, and their adoption of His\nlaw, which the passage predicts; that it is the Temple at Jerusalem\nwhose future supremacy is affirmed; and that there is a strong\nfeeling against war. These, Cheyne contends, are the doctrines of a\nmuch later age than that of Micah; he holds the passage to be the\nwork of a post-exilic imitator of the prophets, which was first\nintruded into the Book of Micah and afterwards borrowed from this\nby an editor of Isaiah's prophecies. It is just here, however, that\nthe theory of these critics loses its strength. Agreeing heartily\nas I do with recent critics that the genuine writings of the early\nprophets have received some, and perhaps considerable, additions from\nthe Exile and later periods, it seems to me extremely improbable\nthat the same post-exilic insertion should find its way into _two_\nseparate books. And I think that the undoubted bias towards the\npost-exilic period of all Canon Cheyne's recent criticism, has in\nthis case hurried him past due consideration of the possibility of\na pre-exilic date. In fact the gentle temper shown by the passage\ntowards foreign nations, the absence of hatred or of any ambition\nto subject the Gentiles to servitude to Israel, contrasts strongly\nwith the temper of many exilic and post-exilic prophecies;[797]\nwhile the position which it demands for Jehovah and His religion\nis quite consistent with the fundamental principles of earlier\nprophecy. The passage really claims no more than a suzerainty of\nJehovah over the heathen tribes, with the result only that their war\nwith Israel and with one another shall cease, not that they shall\nbecome, as the great prophecy of the Exile demands, tributaries and\nservitors. Such a claim was no more than the natural deduction from\nthe early prophets' belief of Jehovah's supremacy in righteousness.\nAnd although Amos had not driven the principle so far as to promise\nthe absolute cessation of war, he also had recognised in the most\nunmistakable fashion the responsibility of the Gentiles to Jehovah,\nand His supreme arbitrament upon them.[798] And Isaiah himself, in\nhis prophecy on Tyre, promised a still more complete subjection of\nthe life of the heathen to the service of Jehovah.[799] Moreover the\nfifth verse of the passage in Micah (though it is true its connection\nwith the previous four is not apparent) is much more in harmony with\npre-exilic than with post-exilic prophecy: _All the nations shall\nwalk each in the name of his god, and we shall walk in the name of\nJehovah our God for ever and aye_. This is consistent with more\nthan one prophetic utterance before the Exile,[800] but it is not\nconsistent with the beliefs of Judaism after the Exile. Finally,\nthe great triumph achieved for Jerusalem in 701 is quite sufficient\nto have prompted the feelings expressed by this passage for the\n_mountain of the house of the Lord_; though if we are to bring it\ndown to a date subsequent to 701, we must rearrange our views with\nregard to the date and meaning of the second chapter of Isaiah. In\nMicah the passage is obviously devoid of all connection, not only\nwith the previous chapter, but with the subsequent verses of chap.\niv. The possibility of a date in the eighth or beginning of the\nseventh century is all that we can determine with regard to it; the\nother questions must remain in obscurity.\n\n2. Verses 6, 7, may refer to the Captivity of Northern Israel, the\nprophet adding that when it shall be restored the united kingdom\nshall be governed from Mount Zion; but a date during the Exile is, of\ncourse, equally probable.\n\n3. Verses 8-13 contain a series of small pictures of Jerusalem in\nsiege, from which, however, she issues triumphant.[801] It is\nimpossible to say whether such a siege is actually in course while\nthe prophet writes, or is pictured by him as inevitable in the near\nfuture. The words _thou shalt go to Babylon_ may be, but are not\nnecessarily, a gloss.\n\n4. Chap. iv. 14-v. 8 again pictures such a siege of Jerusalem, but\npromises a Deliverer out of Bethlehem, the city of David.[802]\nSufficient heroes will be raised up along with him to drive the\nAssyrians from the land, and what is left of Israel after all these\ndisasters shall prove a powerful and sovereign influence upon the\npeoples. These verses were probably not all uttered at the same time.\n\n5. Verses 9-14.--In prospect of such a deliverance the prophet\nreturns to what chap. i. has already described and Isaiah frequently\nemphasises as the sin of Judah--her armaments and fortresses, her\nmagic and idolatries, the things she trusted in instead of Jehovah.\nThey will no more be necessary, and will disappear. The nations that\nserve not Jehovah will feel His wrath.\n\nIn all these oracles there is nothing inconsistent with authorship\nin the eighth century: there is much that witnesses to this date.\nEverything that they threaten or promise is threatened or promised\nby Hosea and by Isaiah, with the exception of the destruction (in\nver. 12) of the Ma\u00e7\u00e7eboth, or sacred pillars, against which we find\nno sentence going forth from Jehovah before the Book of Deuteronomy,\nwhile Isaiah distinctly promises the erection of a Ma\u00e7\u00e7ebah to\nJehovah in the land of Egypt.[803] But waiving for the present the\npossibility of a date for Deuteronomy, or for part of it, in the\nreign of Hezekiah, we must remember the destruction, which took place\nunder this king, of idolatrous sanctuaries in Judah, and feel also\nthat, in spite of such a reform, it was quite possible for Isaiah to\nintroduce a Ma\u00e7\u00e7ebah into his poetic vision of the worship of Jehovah\nin Egypt. For has he not also dared to say that the _harlot's hire_\nof the Ph\u0153nician commerce shall one day be consecrated to Jehovah?\n\n\n THIRD SECTION: CHAPS. VI., VII.\n\nThe style now changes. We have had hitherto a series of short\noracles, as if delivered orally. These are succeeded by a series of\nconferences or arguments, by several speakers. Ewald accounts for the\nchange by supposing that the latter date from a time of persecution,\nwhen the prophet, unable to speak in public, uttered himself in\nliterature. But chap. i. is also dramatic.\n\n1. Chap. vi. 1-8.--An argument in which the prophet as herald calls\non the hills to listen to Jehovah's case against the people (1,\n2). Jehovah Himself appeals to the latter, and in a style similar\nto Hosea's cites His deeds in their history, as evidence of what\nHe seeks from them (3-5). The people, presumably penitent, ask how\nthey shall come before Jehovah (6, 7). And the prophet tells them\nwhat Jehovah has declared in the matter (8). Opening very much like\nMicah's first oracle (chap. i. 1), this argument contains nothing\nstrange either to Micah or the eighth century. Exception has been\ntaken to the reference in ver. 7 to the sacrifice of the first-born,\nwhich appears to have become more common from the gloomy age of\nManasseh onwards, and which, therefore, led Ewald to date all chaps.\nvi. and vii. from that king's reign. But child-sacrifice is stated\nsimply as a possibility, and--occurring as it does at the climax of\nthe sentence--as an extreme possibility.[804] I see no necessity,\ntherefore, to deny the piece to Micah or the reign of Hezekiah. Of\nthose who place it under Manasseh, some, like Driver, still reserve\nit to Micah himself, whom they suppose to have survived Hezekiah and\nseen the evil days which followed.\n\n2. Verses 9-16.--Most expositors[805] take these verses along with\nthe previous eight, as well as with the six which follow in chap.\nvii. But there is no connection between verses 8 and 9; and 9-16\nare better taken by themselves. The prophet heralds, as before, the\nspeech of Jehovah to _tribe and city_(9). Addressing Jerusalem,\nJehovah asks how He can forgive such fraud and violence as those\nby which her wealth has been gathered (10-12). Then addressing the\npeople (note the change from feminine to masculine in the second\npersonal pronouns) He tells them He must smite; they shall not enjoy\nthe fruit of their labours(14, 15). They have sinned the sins of\nOmri and the house of Ahab (query--should it not be of Ahab and\nthe house of Omri?), so that they must be put to shame before the\nGentiles[806](16). In this section three or four words have been\nmarked as of late Hebrew.[807] But this is uncertain, and the\ninference made from it precarious. The deeds of Omri and Ahab's house\nhave been understood as the persecution of the adherents of Jehovah,\nand the passage has, therefore, been assigned by Ewald and others\nto the reign of the tyrant Manasseh. But such habits of persecution\ncould hardly be imputed to the City or People as a whole; and we\nmay conclude that the passage means some other of that notorious\ndynasty's sins. Among these, as is well known, it is possible to\nmake a large selection--the favouring of idolatry, or the tyrannous\nabsorption by the rich of the land of the poor (as in Naboth's case),\na sin which Micah has already marked as that of his age. The whole\ntreatment of the subject, too, whether under the head of the sin or\nits punishment, strongly resembles the style and temper of Amos. It\nis, therefore, by no means impossible for this passage also to have\nbeen Micah's, and we must accordingly leave the question of its date\nundecided. Certainly we are not shut up, as the majority of modern\ncritics suppose, to a date under Manasseh or Amon.\n\n3. Chap. vii. 1-6.--These verses are spoken by the prophet in his own\nname or that of the people's. The land is devastated; the righteous\nhave disappeared; everybody is in ambush to commit deeds of violence\nand take his neighbour unawares. There is no justice: the great ones\nof the land are free to do what they like; they have intrigued with\nand bribed the authorities. Informers have crept in everywhere. Men\nmust be silent, for the members of their own families are their foes.\nSome of these sins have already been marked by Micah as those of his\nage (chap. ii.), but the others point rather to a time of persecution\nsuch as that under Manasseh. Wellhausen remarks the similarity to the\nstate of affairs described in Mal. iii. 24 and in some Psalms. We\ncannot fix the date.\n\n4. Verses 7-20.--This passage starts from a totally different temper of\nprophecy, and presumably, therefore, from very different circumstances.\nIsrael, as a whole, speaks in penitence. She has sinned, and bows\nherself to the consequences, but in hope. A day shall come when her\nexiles shall return and the heathen acknowledge her God. The passage,\nand with it the Book of Micah, concludes by apostrophising Jehovah as\nthe God of forgiveness and grace to His people. Ewald, and following\nhim Driver, assign the passage, with those which precede it, to the\ntimes of Manasseh, in which of course it is possible that Micah was\nstill active, though Ewald supposes a younger and anonymous prophet as\nthe author. Wellhausen[808] goes further, and, while recognising that\nthe situation and temper of the passage resemble those of Isaiah xl.\nff., is inclined to bring it even further down to post-exilic times,\nbecause of the universal character of the Diaspora. Driver objects to\nthese inferences, and maintains that a prophet in the time of Manasseh,\nthinking the destruction of Jerusalem to be nearer than it actually\nwas, may easily have pictured it as having taken place, and put an\nideal confession in the mouth of the people. It seems to me that all\nthese critics have failed to appreciate a piece of evidence even more\nremarkable than any they have insisted on in their argument for a late\ndate. This is, that the passage speaks of a restoration of the people\nonly to Bashan and Gilead, the provinces overrun by Tiglath-Pileser\nIII. in 734. It is not possible to explain such a limitation either by\nthe circumstances of Manasseh's time or by those of the Exile. In the\nformer surely Samaria would have been included; in the latter Zion and\nJudah would have been emphasised before any other region. It would be\neasy for the defenders of a post-exilic date, and especially of a date\nmuch subsequent to the Exile, to account for a longing after Bashan and\nGilead, though they also would have to meet the objection that Samaria\nor Ephraim is not mentioned. But how natural it would be for a prophet\nwriting soon after the captivity of Tiglath-Pileser III. to make this\nprecise selection! And although there remain difficulties (arising from\nthe temper and language of the passage) in the way of assigning all\nof it to Micah or his contemporaries, I feel that on the geographical\nallusions much can be said for the origin of this part of the passage\nin their age, or even in an age still earlier: that of the Syrian\nwars in the end of the ninth century, with which there is nothing\ninconsistent either in the spirit or the language of vv. 14-17. And I\nam sure that if the defenders of a late date had found a selection of\ndistricts as suitable to the post-exilic circumstances of Israel as the\nselection of Bashan and Gilead is to the circumstances of the eighth\ncentury, they would, instead of ignoring it, have emphasised it as a\nconclusive confirmation of their theory. On the other hand, ver. 11 can\ndate only from the Exile, or the following years, before Jerusalem was\nrebuilt. Again, vv. 18-20 appear to stand by themselves.\n\nIt seems likely, therefore, that chap. vii. 7-20 is a Psalm composed\nof little pieces from various dates, which, combined, give us a\npicture of the secular sorrows of Israel, and of the conscience\nshe ultimately felt in them, and conclude by a doxology to the\neverlasting mercies of her God.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[774] See above, pp. 6 f.\n\n[775] Note that the Hebrew and English divisions do not coincide\nbetween chaps. iv. and v. In the Hebrew chap. iv. includes a\nfourteenth verse, which in the English stands as the first verse of\nchap. v. In this the English agrees with the Septuagint.\n\n[776] Caspari.\n\n[777] In the fourth edition of Bleek's _Introduction_.\n\n[778] _Z.A.T.W._, Vols. I., III., IV.\n\n[779] See also Cornill, _Einleitung_, 183 f. Stade takes iv. 1-4,\niv. 11-v. 3, v. 6-14, as originally one prophecy (distinguished by\ncertain catchwords and an outlook similar to that of Ezekiel and the\ngreat Prophet of the Exile), in which the two pieces iv. 5-10 and v.\n4, 5, were afterwards inserted by the author of ii. 12, 13.\n\n[780] _Einleitung in das A.T._, pp. 690 ff.\n\n[781] _Einleitung._\n\n[782] _Untersuchungen \u00fcber dis Textgestalt u. die Echtheit des Buches\nMicha_, 1887.\n\n[783] _De Profetie van Micha_, 1891, which I have not seen. It is\nsummarised in Wildeboer's _Litteratur des A.T._, 1895.\n\n[784] _Introduction_, 1892.\n\n[785] _Litteratur des A.T._, pp. 148 ff.\n\n[786] Wildeboer (_De Profet Micha_), Von Ryssel and Elhorst.\n\n[787] Cheyne, therefore, is not correct when he says (\"Introduction\"\nto second edition of Robertson Smith's _Prophets_, p. xxiii.) that it\nis \"becoming more and more doubtful whether more than two or three\nfragments of the heterogeneous collection of fragments in chaps.\niv.-vii. can have come from that prophet.\"\n\n[788] See above, p. 311.\n\n[789] Wildeboer seems to me to have good grounds for his reply to\nStade's assertion that the occurrence of promises after the threats\nonly blunts and nullifies the latter. \"These objections,\" says\nWildeboer, \"raise themselves only against _the spoken_, but not\nagainst the written word.\" See, too, the admirable remarks he quotes\nfrom De Goeje.\n\n[790] See below, pp. 383 ff.\n\n[791] x. 18.\n\n[792] Smend assigns the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem\nin iii. 14, along with Isaiah xxviii.-xxxii., to 704-701, and\nsuggests that the end of chap. i. refers to Sennacherib's campaign\nin Philistia in 701 (_A. T. Religionsgeschichte_, p. 225, _n._). The\nformer is possible, but the latter passage, following so closely on\ni. 6, which implies the fall of Samaria to be still recent, if not in\nactual course, is more suitably placed in the time of the campaign of\nSargon over pretty much the same ground.\n\n[793] See above, p. 363, _n._ 2.\n\n[794] So Hitzig (\"ohne Zweifel\"), and Cheyne, _Introduction to the\nBook of Isaiah_; Ryssel, _op. cit._, pp. 218 f. Hackmann (_Die\nZukunftserwartung des Jesaia_, 127-8, _n._) prefers the Greek of\nMicah. Ewald is doubtful. Duhm, however, inclines to authorship by\nIsaiah, and would assign the composition to Isaiah's old age.\n\n[795] Hitzig; Ewald.\n\n[796] As against Duhm.\n\n[797] So rightly Duhm on Isa. ii. 2-4.\n\n[798] Amos i. and ii. See above, pp. 124, 133.\n\n[799] Isa. xxiii. 17 f.\n\n[800] Jer. xvii.\n\n[801] Wellhausen indeed thinks that ver. 8 presupposes that Jerusalem\nis already devastated, reduced to the state of a shepherd's tower in\nthe wilderness. This, however, is incorrect. The verse implies only\nthat the whole country is overrun by the foe, Jerusalem alone standing,\nwith the flock of God in it, like a fortified fold (cf. Isaiah i.).\n\n[802] Roorda, reasoning from the Greek text, takes _House of\nEphratha_ as the original reading, with Bethlehem added later; and\nHitzig properly reads Ephrath, giving its final letter to the next\nword which improves the grammar, thus: \u05d4\u05e6\u05e2\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d0\u05e4\u05e8\u05ea\n\n[803] Isa. xix. 19.\n\n[804] So also Wellhausen.\n\n[805] _E.g._ Ewald and Driver.\n\n[806] For \u05e2\u05de\u05d9 read \u05e2\u05de\u05d9\u05dd with the LXX.\n\n[807] Wellhausen states four. But \u05ea\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9\u05d4 of ver. 9 is an uncertain\nreading. \u05e8\u05de\u05d9\u05d4 is found in Hosea vii. 16, though the text of this,\nit is true, is corrupt. \u05d6\u05db\u05d4 in another verbal form is found in Isa.\ni. 16. There only remains \u05de\u05d8\u05d4, but again it is uncertain whether we\nshould take this in its late sense of tribe.\n\n[808] And also Giesebrecht, _Beitr\u00e4ge_, p. 217.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXV\n\n _MICAH THE MORASTHITE_\n\n MICAH i.\n\n\nSome time in the reign of Hezekiah, when the kingdom of Judah was\nstill inviolate, but shivering to the shock of the fall of Samaria,\nand probably while Sargon the destroyer was pushing his way past\nJudah to meet Egypt at Raphia, a Jud\u00e6an prophet of the name of Micah,\nstanding in sight of the Assyrian march, attacked the sins of his\npeople and prophesied their speedy overthrow beneath the same flood\nof war. If we be correct in our surmise, the exact year was 720-719\nB.C. Amos had been silent thirty years, Hosea hardly fifteen; Isaiah\nwas in the midway of his career. The title of Micah's book asserts\nthat he had previously prophesied under Jotham and Ahaz, and though\nwe have seen it to be possible, it is by no means proved, that\ncertain passages of the book date from these reigns.\n\nMicah is called the Morasthite.[809] For this designation\nthere appears to be no other meaning than that of a native of\nMoresheth-Gath, a village mentioned by himself.[810] It signifies\n_Property_ or _Territory_ of Gath, and after the fall of the latter,\nwhich from this time no more appears in history, Moresheth may have\nbeen used alone. Compare the analogous cases of Helkath (_portion\nof_--) Galilee, Ataroth, Chesulloth and Iim.[811]\n\nIn our ignorance of Gath's position, we should be equally at fault\nabout Moresheth, for the name has vanished, were it not for one\nor two plausible pieces of evidence. Belonging to Gath, Moresheth\nmust have lain near the Philistine border: the towns among which\nMicah includes it are situate in that region; and Jerome declares\nthat the name--though the form, Morasthi, in which he cites it is\nsuspicious--was in his time still extant in a small village to the\neast of Eleutheropolis or Beit-Jibrin. Jerome cites Morasthi as\ndistinct from the neighbouring Mareshah, which is also quoted by\nMicah beside Moresheth-Gath.[812]\n\nMoresheth was, therefore, a place in the Shephelah, or range of low\nhills which lie between the hill-country of Judah and the Philistine\nplain. It is the opposite exposure from the wilderness of Tekoa,[813]\nsome seventeen miles away across the watershed. As the home of Amos\nis bare and desert, so the home of Micah is fair and fertile. The\nirregular chalk hills are separated by broad glens, in which the\nsoil is alluvial and red, with room for cornfields on either side of\nthe perennial or almost perennial streams. The olive groves on the\nbraes are finer than either those of the plain below or of the Jud\u00e6an\ntableland above. There is herbage for cattle. Bees murmur everywhere,\nlarks are singing, and although to-day you may wander in the maze\nof hills for hours without meeting a man or seeing a house, you are\nnever out of sight of the traces of ancient habitation, and seldom\nbeyond sound of the human voice--shepherds and ploughmen calling to\ntheir flocks and to each other across the glens. There are none of the\nconditions or of the occasions of a large town. But, like the south of\nEngland, the country is one of villages and homesteads, breeding good\nyeomen--men satisfied and in love with their soil, yet borderers with\na far outlook and a keen vigilance and sensibility. The Shephelah is\nsufficiently detached from the capital and body of the land to beget in\nher sons an independence of mind and feeling, but so much upon the edge\nof the open world as to endue them at the same time with that sense of\nthe responsibilities of warfare, which the national statesmen, aloof\nand at ease in Zion, could not possibly have shared.\n\nUpon one of the westmost terraces of this Shephelah, nearly a\nthousand feet above the sea, lay Moresheth itself. There is a great\nview across the undulating plain with its towns and fortresses,\nLachish, Eglon, Shaphir and others, beyond which runs the coast road,\nthe famous war-path between Asia and Africa. Ashdod and Gaza are\nhardly discernible against the glitter of the sea, twenty-two miles\naway. Behind roll the round bush-covered hills of the Shephelah, with\nDavid's hold at Adullam,[814] the field where he fought Goliath, and\nmany another scene of border warfare; while over them rises the high\nwall of the Jud\u00e6an plateau, with the defiles breaking through it to\nHebron and Bethlehem.\n\nThe valley-mouth near which Moresheth stands has always formed the\nsouth-western gateway of Jud\u00e6a, the Philistine or Egyptian gate, as\nit might be called, with its outpost at Lachish, twelve miles across\nthe plain. Roads converge upon this valley-mouth from all points\nof the compass. Beit-Jibrin, which lies in it, is midway between\nJerusalem and Gaza, about twenty-five miles from either, nineteen\nmiles from Bethlehem and thirteen from Hebron. Visit the place at any\npoint of the long history of Palestine, and you find it either full\nof passengers or a centre of campaign. Asa defeated the Ethiopians\nhere. The Maccabees and John Hyrcanus contested Mareshah, two miles\noff, with the Idumeans. Gabinius fortified Mareshah. Vespasian and\nSaladin both deemed the occupation of the valley necessary before\nthey marched upon Jerusalem. Septimius Severus made Beit-Jibrin\nthe capital of the Shephelah, and laid out military roads, whose\npavements still radiate from it in all directions. The _Onomasticon_\nmeasures distances in the Shephelah from Beit-Jibrin. Most of the\nearly pilgrims from Jerusalem by Gaza to Sinai or Egypt passed\nthrough it, and it was a centre of Crusading operations whether\nagainst Egypt during the Latin kingdom or against Jerusalem during\nthe Third Crusade. Not different was the place in the time of Micah.\nMicah must have seen pass by his door the frequent embassies which\nIsaiah tells us went down to Egypt from Hezekiah's court, and seen\nreturn those Egyptian subsidies in which a foolish people put their\ntrust instead of in their God.\n\nIn touch, then, with the capital, feeling every throb of its\nfolly and its panic, but standing on that border which must, as\nhe believed, bear the brunt of the invasion that its crimes were\nattracting, Micah lifted up his voice. They were days of great\nexcitement. The words of Amos and Hosea had been fulfilled upon\nNorthern Israel. Should Judah escape, whose injustice and impurity\nwere as flagrant as her sister's? It were vain to think so. The\nAssyrians had come up to her northern border. Isaiah was expecting\ntheir assault upon Mount Zion.[815] The Lord's Controversy was not\nclosed. Micah will summon the whole earth to hear the old indictment\nand the still unexhausted sentence.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Hear ye, peoples_[816] _all;_\n _Hearken, O Earth, and her fulness!\n That Jehovah may be among you to testify,_\n _The Lord from His holy temple!_\n _For, lo! Jehovah goeth forth from His place;_\n _He descendeth and marcheth on the heights of the earth._[817]\n _Molten are the mountains beneath Him,_\n _And the valleys gape open,_\n _Like wax in face of the fire,_\n _Like water poured over a fall._\n\nGod speaks:--\n\n _For the transgression of Jacob is all this,_\n _And for the sins of the house of Israel._\n _What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria?_\n _And what is the sin of the house_[818] _of Judah? is it not\n Jerusalem?_\n _Therefore do I turn Samaria into a ruin of the field,_[819]\n _And into vineyard terraces;_\n _And I pour down her stones to the glen,_\n _And lay bare her foundations._[820]\n _All her images are shattered,_\n _And all her hires are being burned in the fire;_\n _And all her idols I lay desolate,_\n _For from the hire of a harlot they were gathered,_[821]\n _And to a harlot's hire they return._[822]\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _For this let me mourn, let me wail,_\n _Let me go barefoot and stripped_ (of my robe),\n _Let me make lamentation like the jackals,_\n _And mourning like the daughters of the desert._[823]\n _For her stroke_[824] _is desperate;_\n _Yea, it hath come unto Judah!_\n _It hath smitten right up to the gate of my people,_\n _Up to Jerusalem._\n\nWithin the capital itself Isaiah was also recording the extension of\nthe Assyrian invasion to its walls, but in a different temper.[825] He\nwas full of the exulting assurance that, although at the very gate,\nthe Assyrian could not harm the city of Jehovah, but must fall when\nhe lifted his impious hand against it. Micah has no such hope: he is\noverwhelmed with the thought of Jerusalem's danger. Provincial though\nhe be, and full of wrath at the danger into which the politicians of\nJerusalem had dragged the whole country, he profoundly mourns the\nperil of the capital, _the gate of my people_, as he fondly calls her.\nTherefore we must not exaggerate the frequently drawn contrast between\nIsaiah and himself.[826] To Micah also Jerusalem was dear, and his\nsubsequent prediction of her overthrow[827] ought to be read with the\naccent of this previous mourning for her peril. Nevertheless his heart\nclings most to his own home, and while Isaiah pictures the Assyrian\nentering Judah from the north by Migron, Michmash and Nob, Micah\nanticipates invasion by the opposite gateway of the land, at the door\nof his own village. His elegy sweeps across the landscape so dear to\nhim. This obscure province was even more than Jerusalem his world, the\nworld of his heart. It gives us a living interest in the man that the\nfate of these small villages, many of them vanished, should excite in\nhim more passion than the fortunes of Zion herself. In such a passion\nwe can incarnate his spirit. Micah is no longer a book, or an oration,\nbut flesh and blood upon a home and a countryside of his own. We see\nhim on his housetop pouring forth his words before the hills and the\nfar-stretching heathen land. In the name of every village within sight\nhe reads a symbol of the curse that is coming upon his country, and\nof the sins that have earned the curse. So some of the greatest poets\nhave caught their music from the nameless brooklets of their boyhood's\nfields; and many a prophet has learned to read the tragedy of man and\nGod's verdict upon sin in his experience of village life. But there was\nmore than feeling in Micah's choice of his own country as the scene\nof the Assyrian invasion. He had better reasons for his fears than\nIsaiah, who imagined the approach of the Assyrian from the north. For\nit is remarkable how invaders of Jud\u00e6a, from Sennacherib to Vespasian\nand from Vespasian to Saladin and Richard, have shunned the northern\naccess to Jerusalem and endeavoured to reach her by the very gateway at\nwhich Micah stood mourning. He had, too, this greater motive for his\nfear, that Sargon, as we have seen, was actually in the neighbourhood,\nmarching to the defeat of Judah's chosen patron, Egypt. Was it not\nprobable that, when the latter was overthrown, Sargon would turn back\nupon Judah by Lachish and Mareshah? If we keep this in mind we shall\nappreciate, not only the fond anxiety, but the political foresight\nthat inspires the following passage, which is to our Western taste so\nstrangely cast in a series of plays upon place-names. The disappearance\nof many of these names, and our ignorance of the transactions to\nwhich the verses allude, often render both the text and the meaning\nvery uncertain. Micah begins with the well-known play upon the name\nof Gath; the Acco which he couples with it is either the Ph\u0153nician\nport to the north of Carmel, the modern Acre, or some Philistine\ntown, unknown to us, but in any case the line forms with the previous\none an intelligible couplet: _Tell it not in Tell-town; Weep not in\nWeep-town_. The following Beth-le-'Aphrah, _House of Dust_, must be\ntaken with them, for in the phrase _roll thyself_ there is a play upon\nthe name Philistine. So, too, Shaphir, or Beauty, the modern Suaf\u00eer,\nlay in the Philistine region. Sa'anan and Beth-esel and Maroth are\nunknown; but if Micah, as is probable, begins his list far away on the\nwestern horizon and comes gradually inland, they also are to be sought\nfor on the maritime plain. Then he draws nearer by Lachish, on the\nfirst hills, and in the leading pass towards Judah, to Moresheth-Gath,\nAchzib, Mareshah and Adullam, which all lie within Israel's territory\nand about the prophet's own home. We understand the allusion, at least,\nto Lachish in ver. 13. As the last Jud\u00e6an outpost towards Egypt, and on\na main road thither, Lachish would receive the Egyptian subsidies of\nhorses and chariots, in which the politicians put their trust instead\nof in Jehovah. Therefore she _was the beginning of sin to the daughter\nof Zion_. And if we can trust the text of ver. 14, Lachish would pass\non the Egyptian ambassadors to Moresheth-Gath, the next stage of their\napproach to Jerusalem. But this is uncertain. With Moresheth-Gath is\ncoupled Achzib, a town at some distance from Jerome's site for the\nformer, to the neighbourhood of which, Mareshah, we are brought back\nagain in ver. 15. Adullam, with which the list closes, lies some eight\nor ten miles to the north-east of Mareshah.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Tell it not in Gath,_\n _Weep not in Acco,_[828]\n _In Beth-le-'Aphrah_[829] _roll thyself in dust._\n _Pass over, inhabitress of Shaphir,_[830] _thy shame\n uncovered!_\n _The inhabitress of Sa'anan_[831] _shall not march forth;_\n _The lamentation of Beth-esel_[832] _taketh from you its\n standing._\n _The inhabitress of Maroth_[833] _trembleth for good,\n For evil hath come down from Jehovah to the gate of\n Jerusalem._\n _Harness the horse to the chariot, inhabitress of\n Lachish,_[834]\n _That hast been the beginning of sin to the daughter of Zion;_\n _Yea, in thee are found the transgressions of Israel._\n _Therefore thou givest ..._[835] _to Moresheth-Gath:_[836]\n _The houses of Achzib_[837] _shall deceive the kings of\n Israel._\n _Again shall I bring the Possessor_ [_conqueror_] _to thee,\n inhabitress of Mareshah;_[838]\n _To Adullam_[839] _shall come the glory of Israel._\n _Make thee bald, and shave thee for thy darlings;_\n _Make broad thy baldness like the vulture,_\n _For they go into banishment from thee._\n\nThis was the terrible fate which the Assyrian kept before the peoples\nwith whom he was at war. Other foes raided, burned and slew: he\ncarried off whole populations into exile.\n\nHaving thus pictured the doom which threatened his people, Micah\nturns to declare the sins for which it has been sent upon them.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[809] Micah i.; Jer. xxvi. 18.\n\n[810] i. 14.\n\n[811] Ataroth (Numb. xxxii. 3) is Atroth-Shophan (_ib._ 35);\nChesulloth (Josh. xix. 18) is Chisloth-Tabor (_ib._ 12); Iim (Numb.\nxxxiii. 45) is Iye-Abarim (_ib._ 44).\n\n[812] \"Mich\u00e6am de Morasthi qui usque hodie juxta Eleutheropolim,\nhaud grandis est viculus.\"--Jerome, Preface to Micha. \"Morasthi,\nunde fuit Micheas propheta, est autem vicus contra orientem\nEleutheropoleos.\"--_Onomasticon_, which also gives \"Maresa, in\ntribu Juda: cuius nunc tantummodo sunt ruin\u00e6 in secundo lapide\nEleutheropoleos.\" See, too, the _Epitaphium S. Paul\u00e6_: \"Videam\nMorasthim sepulchrum quondam Mich\u00e6\u00e6, nunc ecclesiam, et ex latere\nderelinquam Chor\u00e6os, et Gitth\u00e6os et Maresam.\" The occurrence of a\nplace bearing the name Property-of-Gath so close to Beit-Jibrin\ncertainly strengthens the claims of the latter to be Gath. See _Hist.\nGeog._, p. 196.\n\n[813] See above, pp. 74 ff.\n\n[814] For the situation of Adullam in the Shephelah see _Hist.\nGeog._, p. 229.\n\n[815] Isa. x. 28 ff. This makes it quite conceivable that Micah i.\n9, _it hath struck right up to the gate of Jerusalem_, was composed\nimmediately after the fall of Samaria, and not, as Sinend imagines,\nduring the campaign of Sennacherib. Against the latter date there\nis the objection that by then the fall of Samaria, which Micah i. 6\ndescribes as present, was already nearly twenty years past.\n\n[816] The address is either to the tribes, in which case we must\nsubstitute _land_ for _earth_ in the next line; or much more probably\nit is to the Gentile _nations_, but in this case we cannot translate\n(as all do) in the third line that the Lord will be a witness _against_\nthem, for the charge is only against Israel. They are summoned in\nthe same sense as Amos summons a few of the nations in chap. iii. 9\nff.--The opening words of Micah are original to this passage, and\ninterpolated in the exordium of the other Micah, 1 Kings xxii. 28.\n\n[817] Jehovah's _Temple_ or _Place_ is not, as in earlier poems,\nSinai or Seir (cf. Deborah's song and Deut. xxxiii.), but Heaven (cf.\nIsaiah xix. or Psalm xxix.).\n\n[818] So LXX. and other versions.\n\n[819] Wellhausen's objections to this phrase are arbitrary and\nincorrect. A ruin in the midst of soil gone out of cultivation, where\nbefore there had been a city among vineyards, is a striking figure of\ndesolation.\n\n[820] Which is precisely how Herod's Samaria lies at the present day.\n\n[821] So Ewald.\n\n[822] It must be kept in mind that all the verbs in the above passage\nmay as correctly be given in the future tense; in that case the\npassage will be dated just before the fall of Samaria, in 722-1,\ninstead of just after.\n\n[823] \u05d9\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea, that is, the ostriches: cf. Arab, wa'ana, \"white,\nbarren ground.\" The Arabs call the ostrich \"father of the desert: abu\nsah\u00e2r\u00e2.\"\n\n[824] LXX.\n\n[825] Isa. x. 28 ff.\n\n[826] It is well put by Robertson Smith's _Prophets_^2, pp. 289 ff.\n\n[827] iii. 12.\n\n[828] LXX. \u1f10\u03bd \u1f08\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc; Heb. \"weep not at all.\"\n\n[829] \u05dc\u05b0\u05bd\u05e2\u05b7\u05e4\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4 cannot be the Ophrah, \u05e2\u05b8\u05e4\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4, of Benjamin. It may\nbe connected with \u05e2\u05b9\u05e4\u05b6\u05e8, a gazelle; and it is to be noted that S. of\nBeit-Jibrin there is a wady now called El-Ghufr, the corresponding\nArabic word. But, as stated in the text above, the name ought to be\none of a Philistine town.\n\n[830] Beauty town. This is usually taken to be the modern Suaf\u00eer\non the Philistine plain, 4-1/2 miles S.E. of Ashdod, a site not\nunsuitable for identification with the \u03a3\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1 of the _Onom._,\n\"between Eleutheropolis and Ascalon,\" except that \u03a3\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1 is also\ndescribed as \"in the hill country.\" Gu\u00e9rin found the name Safar a\nvery little N. of Beit-J\u00edbrin (_Jud\u00e9e_, II. 317).\n\n[831] March-town: perhaps the same as \u1e62enan (\u05e6\u05b5\u05e0\u05b7\u05df) of Josh. xv. 37;\ngiven along with Migdal-Gad and Hadashah; not identified.\n\n[832] Unknown.\n\n[833] \"Bitternesses\": unknown.\n\n[834] Tell-el-Hesy.\n\n[835] _Ambassadors_ or _letters of dismissal_.\n\n[836] See above, p. 376.\n\n[837] Josh. xv. 44; mentioned with Keilah and Mareshah; perhaps the\npresent Ain Kezbeh, 8 miles N.N.E. of Beit-Jibrin.\n\n[838] \u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05b5\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05d4, but in Josh. xv. 44 \u05de\u05e8\u05d0\u05e9\u05d4, which is identical with\nspelling of the present name of a ruin 1 mile S. of Beit-Jibrin.\n\u039c\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1 is placed by Eusebius (_Onom._) 2 Roman miles S. of\nEleutheropolis ( = Beit-Jibrin).\n\n[839] 6 miles N.E. of Beit-Jibrin.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVI\n\n _THE PROPHET OF THE POOR_\n\n MICAH ii., iii.\n\n\nWe have proved Micah's love for his countryside in the effusion of\nhis heart upon her villages with a grief for their danger greater\nthan his grief for Jerusalem. Now in his treatment of the sins\nwhich give that danger its fatal significance, he is inspired by\nthe same partiality for the fields and the folk about him. While\nIsaiah chiefly satirises the fashions of the town and the intrigues\nof the court, Micah scourges the avarice of the landowner and the\ninjustice which oppresses the peasant. He could not, of course, help\nsharing Isaiah's indignation for the fatal politics of the capital,\nany more than Isaiah could help sharing his sense of the economic\ndangers of the provinces;[840] but it is the latter with which Micah\nis most familiar and on which he spends his wrath. These so engross\nhim, indeed, that he says almost nothing about the idolatry, or the\nluxury, or the hideous vice, which, according to Amos and Hosea, were\nnow corrupting the nation.\n\nSocial wrongs are always felt most acutely, not in the town, but in\nthe country. It was so in the days of Rome, whose earliest social\nrevolts were agrarian.[841] It was so in the Middle Ages: the\nfourteenth century saw both the Jacquerie in France and the Peasants'\nRising in England; Langland, who was equally familiar with town and\ncountry, expends nearly all his sympathy upon the poverty of the\nlatter, \"the poure folk in cotes.\" It was so after the Reformation,\nunder the new spirit of which the first social revolt was the\nPeasants' War in Germany. It was so at the French Revolution, which\nbegan with the march of the starving peasants into Paris. And it is\nso still, for our new era of social legislation has been forced open,\nnot by the poor of London and the large cities, but by the peasantry\nof Ireland and the crofters of the Scottish Highlands. Political\ndiscontent and religious heresy take their start among industrial and\nmanufacturing centres, but the first springs of the social revolt are\nnearly always found among rural populations.\n\nWhy the country should begin to feel the acuteness of social wrong\nbefore the town is sufficiently obvious. In the town there are\nmitigations, and there are escapes. If the conditions of one trade\nbecome oppressive, it is easier to pass to another. The workers are\nbetter educated and better organised; there is a middle class, and\nthe tyrant dare not bring matters to so high a crisis. The might of\nthe wealthy, too, is divided; the poor man's employer is seldom at\nthe same time his landlord. But in the country power easily gathers\ninto the hands of the few. The labourer's opportunities and means of\nwork, his home, his very standing-ground, are often all of them the\nproperty of one man. In the country the rich have a real power of\nlife and death, and are less hampered by competition with each other\nand by the force of public opinion. One man cannot hold a city in\nfee, but one man can affect for evil or for good almost as large a\npopulation as a city's, when it is scattered across a countryside.\n\nThis is precisely the state of wrong which Micah attacks. The social\nchanges of the eighth century in Israel were peculiarly favourable\nto its growth.[842] The enormous increase of money which had been\nproduced by the trade of Uzziah's reign threatened to overwhelm\nthe simple economy under which every family had its croft. As in\nmany another land and period, the social problem was the descent\nof wealthy men, land-hungry, upon the rural districts. They made\nthe poor their debtors, and bought out the peasant proprietors.\nThey absorbed into their power numbers of homes, and had at their\nindividual disposal the lives and the happiness of thousands of\ntheir fellow-countrymen. Isaiah had cried, _Woe upon them that join\nhouse to house, that lay field to field, till there be no room_\nfor the common people, and the inhabitants of the rural districts\ngrow fewer and fewer.[843] Micah pictures the recklessness of those\nplutocrats--the fatal ease with which their wealth enabled them to\ndispossess the yeomen of Judah.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Woe to them that plan mischief,_\n _And on their beds work out evil!_\n _As soon as morning breaks they put it into execution,_\n _For--it lies to the power of their hands!\n They covet fields and--seize them,_\n _Houses and--lift them up._\n _So they crush a good man and his home,_\n _A man and his heritage._\n\nThis is the evil--the ease with which wrong is done in the country!\n_It lies to the power of their hands: they covet and seize._ And\nwhat is it that they get so easily--not merely field and house,\nso much land and stone and lime: it is human life, with all that\nmakes up personal independence, and the security of home and of the\nfamily. That these should be at the mercy of the passion or the\ncaprice of one man--this is what stirs the prophet's indignation.\nWe shall presently see how the tyranny of wealth was aided by the\nbribed and unjust judges of the country; and how, growing reckless,\nthe rich betook themselves, as the lords of the feudal system in\nEurope continually did, to the basest of assaults upon the persons of\npeaceful men and women. But meantime Micah feels that by themselves\nthe economic wrongs explain and justify the doom impending on the\nnation. When this doom falls, by the Divine irony of God it shall\ntake the form of a conquest of the land by the heathen, and the\ndisposal of these great estates to the foreigner.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Therefore thus saith Jehovah:_\n _Behold, I am planning evil against this race,_\n _From which ye shall not withdraw your necks,_\n _Nor walk upright;_\n _For an evil time it is!_[844]\n _In that day shall they raise a taunt-song against you,_\n _And wail out the wailing_ (\"_It is done_\");[845] _and say,_\n _\"We be utterly undone:_\n _My people's estate is measured off!_[846]\n _How they take it away from me!_[847]\n _To the rebel our fields are allotted.\"_\n _So thou shalt have none to cast the line by lot_\n _In the congregation of Jehovah._\n\nNo restoration at time of Jubilee for lands taken away in this\nfashion! There will be no congregation of Jehovah left!\n\nAt this point the prophet's pessimist discourse, that must have\ngalled the rich, is interrupted by their clamour to him to stop.\n\nThe rich speak:--\n\n _Prate not, they prate, let none prate of such things!_\n _Revilings will never cease!_\n _O thou that speakest_ thus _to the house of Jacob,_[848]\n _Is the spirit of Jehovah cut short?_\n _Or are such His doings?_\n _Shall not His words mean well with him that walketh\n uprightly?_\n\nSo the rich, in their immoral confidence that Jehovah was neither\nweakened nor could permit such a disaster to fall on His own people,\ntell the prophet that his sentence of doom on the nation, and\nespecially on themselves, is absurd, impossible. They cry the eternal\ncry of Respectability: \"God can mean no harm to the like of us! His\nwords are good to them that walk uprightly--and we are conscious of\nbeing such. What you, prophet, have charged us with are nothing but\nnatural transactions.\" The Lord Himself has His answer ready. Upright\nindeed! They have been unprovoked plunderers!\n\nGod speaks:--\n\n _But ye are the foes of My people,_\n _Rising against those that are peaceful;_\n _The mantle ye strip from them that walk quietly by,_\n _Averse to war!_[849]\n _Women of My people ye tear from their happy homes,_[850]\n _From their children ye take My glory for ever._\n _Rise and begone--for this is no resting-place!_\n _Because of the uncleanness that bringeth destruction,_\n _Destruction incurable._\n\nOf the outrages on the goods of honest men, and the persons of women\nand children, which are possible in a time of peace, when the rich\nare tyrannous and abetted by mercenary judges and prophets, we have\nan illustration analogous to Micah's in the complaint of Peace in\nLangland's vision of English society in the fourteenth century. The\nparallel to our prophet's words is very striking:--\n\n \"And thanne come Pees into parlement \u00b7 and put forth a bille,\n How Wronge ageines his wille \u00b7 had his wyf taken.\n 'Both my gees and my grys[851] \u00b7 his gadelynges[852] feccheth;\n I dar noughte for fere of hym \u00b7 fyghte ne chyde.\n He borwed of me bayard[853] \u00b7 he broughte hym home nevre,\n Ne no ferthynge ther-fore \u00b7 for naughte I couthe plede.\n He meynteneth his men \u00b7 to marther myne hewen,[854]\n Forstalleth my feyres[855] \u00b7 and fighteth in my chepynge,\n And breketh up my bernes dore \u00b7 and bereth aweye my whete,\n And taketh me but a taile[856] \u00b7 for ten quarters of otes,\n And yet he bet me ther-to \u00b7 and lyth bi my mayde,\n I nam[857] noughte hardy for hym \u00b7 uneth[858] to loke.'\"\n\nThey pride themselves that all is stable and God is with them. How can\nsuch a state of affairs be stable! They feel at ease, yet injustice can\nnever mean rest. God has spoken the final sentence, but with a rare\nsarcasm the prophet adds his comment on the scene. These rich men had\nbeen flattered into their religious security by hireling prophets, who\nhad opposed himself. As they leave the presence of God, having heard\ntheir sentence, Micah looks after them and muses in quiet prose.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n_Yea, if one whose walk is wind and falsehood were to try to cozen_\nthee, saying, _I will babble to thee of wine and strong drink, then\nhe might be the prophet of such a people._\n\nAt this point in chap. ii. there have somehow slipped into the text\ntwo verses (12, 13), which all are agreed do not belong to it, and\nfor which we must find another place.[859] They speak of a return\nfrom the Exile, and interrupt the connection between ver. 11 and\nthe first verse of chap. iii. With the latter Micah begins a series\nof three oracles, which give the substance of his own prophesying\nin contrast to that of the false prophets whom he has just been\nsatirising. He has told us what they say, and he now begins the first\nof his own oracles with the words, _But I said_. It is an attack upon\nthe authorities of the nation, whom the false prophets flatter. Micah\nspeaks very plainly to them. Their business is to know justice, and\nyet they love wrong. They flay the people with their exactions; they\ncut up the people like meat.\n\n The prophet speaks:--_But I said,_\n _Hear now, O chiefs Of Jacob,_\n _And rulers of the house of Israel:_\n _Is it not yours to know justice?--_\n _Haters of good and lovers of evil,_\n _Tearing their hide from upon them_\n (he points to the people),\n _And their flesh from the bones of them;_\n _And who devour the flesh of my people,_\n _And their hide they have stripped from them_\n _And their bones have they cleft,_\n _And served it up as if from a pot,_\n _Like meat from the thick of the caldron!_\n _At that time shall they cry to Jehovah,_\n _And He will not answer them;_\n _But hide His face from them at that time,_\n _Because they have aggravated their deeds._\n\nThese words of Micah are terribly strong, but there have been many\nother ages and civilisations than his own of which they have been no\nmore than true. \"They crop us,\" said a French peasant of the lords\nof the great Louis' time, \"as the sheep crops grass.\" \"They treat us\nlike their food,\" said another on the eve of the Revolution.\n\nIs there nothing of the same with ourselves? While Micah spoke he\nhad wasted lives and bent backs before him. His speech is elliptic\ntill you see his finger pointing at them. Pinched peasant-faces peer\nbetween all his words and fill the ellipses. And among the living\npoor to-day are there not starved and bitten faces--bodies with\nthe blood sucked from them, with the Divine image crushed out of\nthem? Brothers, we cannot explain all of these by vice. Drunkenness\nand unthrift do account for much; but how much more is explicable\nonly by the following facts! Many men among us are able to live in\nfashionable streets and keep their families comfortable only by\npaying their employ\u00e9s a wage upon which it is impossible for men\nto be strong or women to be virtuous. Are those not using these\nas their food? They tell us that if they are to give higher wages\nthey must close their business, and cease paying wages at all; and\nthey are right if they themselves continue to live on the scale\nthey do. As long as many families are maintained in comfort by the\nprofits of businesses in which some or all of the employ\u00e9s work\nfor less than they can nourish and repair their bodies upon, the\nsimple fact is that the one set are feeding upon the other set. It\nmay be inevitable, it may be the fault of the system and not of the\nindividual, it may be that to break up the system would mean to make\nthings worse than ever--but all the same the truth is clear that\nmany families of the middle class, and some of the very wealthiest\nof the land, are nourished by the waste of the lives of the poor.\nNow and again the fact is acknowledged with as much shamelessness as\nwas shown by any tyrant in the days of Micah. To a large employer of\nlabour, who was complaining that his employ\u00e9s, by refusing to live\nat the low scale of Belgian workmen, were driving trade from this\ncountry, the present writer once said: \"Would it not meet your wishes\nif, instead of your workmen being levelled down, the Belgians were\nlevelled up? This would make the competition fair between you and the\nemployers in Belgium.\" His answer was, \"I care not so long as I get\nmy profits.\" He was a religious man, a liberal giver to his Church,\nand he died leaving more than one hundred thousand pounds.\n\nMicah's tyrants, too, had religion to support them. A number of the\nhireling prophets, whom we have seen both Amos and Hosea attack,\ngave their blessing to this social system, which crushed the poor,\nfor they shared its profits. They lived upon the alms of the rich,\nand flattered according as they were fed. To them Micah devotes the\nsecond oracle of chap. iii., and we find confirmed by his words\nthe principle we laid down before, that in that age the one great\ndifference between the false and the true prophet was what it has\nbeen in every age since then till now--an ethical difference; and\nnot a difference of dogma, or tradition, or ecclesiastical note. The\nfalse prophet spoke, consciously or unconsciously, for himself and\nhis living. He sided with the rich; he shut his eyes to the social\ncondition of the people; he did not attack the sins of the day. This\nmade him _false_--robbed him of insight and the power of prediction.\nBut the true prophet exposed the sins of his people. Ethical insight\nand courage, burning indignation of wrong, clear vision of the facts\nof the day--this was what Jehovah's spirit put into him, this was\nwhat Micah felt to be inspiration.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Thus saith Jehovah against the prophets who lead my people astray,_\n _Who while they have ought between their teeth proclaim peace._\n _But against him who will not lay to their mouths they sanctify war!_\n _Wherefore night shall be yours without vision,_\n _And yours shall be darkness without divination;_\n _And the sun shall go down on the prophets,_\n _And the day shall darken about them;_\n _And the seers shall be put to the blush,_\n _And the diviners be ashamed:_\n _All of them shall cover the beard,_\n _For there shall be no answer from God._\n _But I--I am full of power by the spirit of Jehovah, and justice and\n might,_\n _To declare to Jacob his transgressions and to Israel his sin._\n\nIn the third oracle of this chapter rulers and prophets are\ncombined--how close the conspiracy between them! It is remarkable\nthat, in harmony with Isaiah, Micah speaks no word against the king.\nBut evidently Hezekiah had not power to restrain the nobles and the\nrich. When this oracle was uttered it was a time of peace, and the\nlavish building, which we have seen to be so marked a characteristic\nof Israel in the eighth century,[860] was in process. Jerusalem was\nlarger and finer than ever. Ah, it was a building of God's own city _in\nblood_! Judges, priests and prophets were all alike mercenary, and the\npoor were oppressed for a reward. No walls, however sacred, could stand\non such foundations. Did they say that they built her so grandly, for\nJehovah's sake? Did they believe her to be inviolate because He was in\nher? They should see. Zion--yes, Zion--should be ploughed like a field,\nand the Mountain of the Lord's Temple become desolate.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Hear now this, O chiefs of the house of Jacob,_\n _And rulers of the house of Israel,_\n _Who spurn justice and twist all that is straight,_\n _Building Zion in blood, and Jerusalem with crime!_\n _Her chiefs give judgment for a bribe,_\n _And her priests oracles for a reward,_\n _And her prophets divine for silver;_\n _And on Jehovah they lean, saying:_\n \"_Is not Jehovah in the midst of us?_\n _Evil cannot come at us._\"\n _Therefore for your sakes shall Zion be ploughed like a field,_\n _And Jerusalem become heaps,_\n _And the Mount of the House mounds in a jungle._\n\nIt is extremely difficult for us to place ourselves in a state of\nsociety in which bribery is prevalent, and the fingers both of justice\nand of religion are gilded by their suitors. But this corruption\nhas always been common in the East. \"An Oriental state can never\naltogether prevent the abuse by which officials, small and great,\nenrich themselves in illicit ways.\"[861] The strongest government takes\nthe bribery for granted, and periodically prunes the rank fortunes of\nits great officials. A weak government lets them alone. But in either\ncase the poor suffer from unjust taxation and from laggard or perverted\njustice. Bribery has always been found, even in the more primitive and\npuritan forms of Semitic life. Mr. Doughty has borne testimony with\nregard to this among the austere Wahabees of Central Arabia. \"When I\nasked if there were no handling of bribes at H\u00e2yil by those who are\nnigh the prince's ear, it was answered, 'Nay.' The Byzantine corruption\ncannot enter into the eternal and noble simplicity of this people's\n(airy) life, in the poor nomad country; but (we have seen) the art is\nnot unknown to the subtle-headed Shammar princes, who thereby help\nthemselves with the neighbour Turkish governments.\"[862] The bribes\nof the ruler of H\u00e2yil \"are, according to the shifting weather of the\nworld, to great Ottoman government men; and now on account of Kheybar,\nhe was gilding some of their crooked fingers in Medina.\"[863] Nothing\nmarks the difference of Western government more than the absence of all\nthis, especially from our courts of justice. Yet the improvement has\nonly come about within comparatively recent centuries. What a large\nspace, for instance, does Langland give to the arraigning of \"Mede,\"\nthe corrupter of all authorities and influences in the society of\nhis day! Let us quote his words, for again they provide a most exact\nparallel to Micah's, and may enable us to realise a state of life so\ncontrary to our own. It is Conscience who arraigns Mede before the\nKing:--\n\n \"By ihesus with here jeweles \u00b7 youre justices she shendeth,[864]\n And lith[865] agein the lawe \u00b7 and letteth hym the gate,\n That feith may noughte have his forth[866] \u00b7 here floreines go so\n thikke,\n She ledeth the lawe as hire list \u00b7 and lovedays maketh\n And doth men lese thorw hire love \u00b7 that law myghte wynne,\n The mase[867] for a mene man \u00b7 though he mote[868] hir eure.\n Law is so lordeliche \u00b7 and loth to make ende,\n Without presentz or pens[869] \u00b7 she pleseth wel fewe.\n\n * * * * *\n\n For pore men mowe[870] have no powere \u00b7 to pleyne[871] hem though\n thei smerte;\n Suche a maistre is Mede \u00b7 amonge men of gode.\"[872]\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[840] Isa. v. 8.\n\n[841] Mr. Congreve, in his Essay on Slavery appended to his edition\nof Aristotle's _Politics_, p. 496, points out that all the servile\nwars from which Rome suffered arose, not in the capital, but in the\nprovinces, notably in Sicily.\n\n[842] See above, pp. 32 ff.\n\n[843] Isa. v. 8.\n\n[844] Cf. Amos v. 13.\n\n[845] \"Fuit.\" But whether this is a gloss, as of the name of the\ndirge or of the tune, or a part of the text, is uncertain. Query:\n\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e0\u05d4\u05d4 \u05d5\u05e0\u05d7\u05d4.\n\n[846] So LXX., and adds: \"with the measuring rope.\"\n\n[847] Or (after the LXX.) _there is none to give it back to me_.\n\n[848] Uncertain. \"Is the house of Jacob...?\" (Wellhausen). \"What a\nsaying, O house of Jacob?\" (Ewald and Guthe). In the latter case the\ninterruption of the rich ceases with the previous line, and this one\nis the beginning of the prophet's answer to them.\n\n[849] So we may conjecture the very obscure details of a verse whose\ngeneral meaning, however, is evident. For \u05d5\u05d0\u05ea\u05de\u05d5\u05dc read \u05dc \u05d5\u05d0\u05ea\u05dd. The LXX.\ntakes \u05e9\u05dc\u05de\u05d4 as _peace_ and not as _cloak_, for which there seems to be\nno place beside \u05d0\u05d3\u05e8 (or \u05d0\u05d3\u05e8\u05ea). Wellhausen with further alterations\nrenders: \"But ye come forward as enemies against My people; from good\nfriends ye rob their ..., from peaceful wanderers war-booty.\"\n\n[850] Wellhausen reads \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 for \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea, \"tenderly bred children,\" another\nof the many emendations which he proposes in the interests of\ncomplete parallelism. See the Preface to this volume.\n\n[851] Little pigs.\n\n[852] Fellows.\n\n[853] A horse.\n\n[854] Servants.\n\n[855] Fairs, markets.\n\n[856] A tally.\n\n[857] Am not.\n\n[858] Scarcely.\n\n[859]\n\n _I will gather, gather thee, O Jacob, in mass,_\n _I will bring, bring together the Remnant of Israel!_\n _I will set them like sheep in a fold,_\n _Like a flock in the midst of the pasture._\n _They shall hum with men!_\n _The breach-breaker hath gone up before them:_\n _They have broken the breach, have carried the gate, and are gone out\n by it;_\n _And their king hath passed on before them, and Jehovah at their\n head._\n\n[860] See above, p. 33.\n\n[861] N\u00f6ldeke, _Sketches from Eastern History_, translated by Black,\npp. 134 f.\n\n[862] _Arabia Deserta_, I. 607.\n\n[863] _Id._, II. 20.\n\n[864] Ruins.\n\n[865] Lieth.\n\n[866] Course.\n\n[867] Confusion.\n\n[868] Summon.\n\n[869] Pence.\n\n[870] May.\n\n[871] Complain.\n\n[872] Substance or property.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVII\n\n _ON TIME'S HORIZON_\n\n MICAH iv. 1-7.\n\n\nThe immediate prospect of Zion's desolation which closes chap. iii.\nis followed in the opening of chap. iv. by an ideal picture of her\nexaltation and supremacy _in the issue of the days_. We can hardly\ndoubt that this arrangement has been made of purpose, nor can we deny\nthat it is natural and artistic. Whether it be due to Micah himself,\nor whether he wrote the second passage, are questions we have already\ndiscussed.[873] Like so many others of their kind, they cannot be\nanswered with certainty, far less with dogmatism. But I repeat, I\nsee no conclusive reason for denying either to the circumstances\nof Micah's times or to the principles of their prophecy the\npossibility of such a hope as inspires chap. iv. 1-4. Remember how\nthe prophets of the eighth century identified Jehovah with supreme\nand universal righteousness; remember how Amos explicitly condemned\nthe aggravations of war and slavery among the heathen as sins against\nHim, and how Isaiah claimed the future gains of Tyrian commerce as\ngifts for His sanctuary; remember how Amos heard His voice come forth\nfrom Jerusalem, and Isaiah counted upon the eternal inviolateness\nof His shrine and city,--and you will not think it impossible for a\nthird Jud\u00e6an prophet of that age, whether he was Micah or another, to\nhave drawn the prospect of Jerusalem which now opens before us.\n\nIt is the far-off horizon of time, which, like the spatial horizon,\nalways seems a fixed and eternal line, but as constantly shifts\nwith the shifting of our standpoint or elevation. Every prophet has\nhis own vision of _the latter days_; seldom is that prospect the\nsame. Determined by the circumstances of the seer, by the desires\nthese prompt or only partially fulfil, it changes from age to age.\nThe ideal is always shaped by the real, and in this vision of the\neighth century there is no exception. This is not any of the ideals\nof later ages, when the evil was the oppression of the Lord's people\nby foreign armies or their scattering in exile; it is not, in\ncontrast to these, the spectacle of the armies of the Lord of Hosts\nimbrued in the blood of the heathen, or of the columns of returning\ncaptives filling all the narrow roads to Jerusalem, _like streams\nin the south_; nor, again, is it a nation of priests gathering\nabout a rebuilt temple and a restored ritual. But because the pain\nof the greatest minds of the eighth century was the contradiction\nbetween faith in the God of Zion as Universal Righteousness and the\nexperience that, nevertheless, Zion had absolutely no influence upon\nsurrounding nations, this vision shows a day when Zion's influence\nwill be as great as her right, and from far and wide the nations\nwhom Amos has condemned for their transgressions against Jehovah\nwill acknowledge His law, and be drawn to Jerusalem to learn of\nHim. Observe that nothing is said of Israel going forth to teach\nthe nations the law of the Lord. That is the ideal of a later age,\nwhen Jews were scattered across the world. Here, in conformity with\nthe experience of a still untravelled people, we see the Gentiles\ndrawing in upon the Mountain of the House of the Lord. With the same\nlofty impartiality which distinguishes the oracles of Amos on the\nheathen, the prophet takes no account of their enmity to Israel; nor\nis there any talk--such as later generations were almost forced by\nthe hostility of neighbouring tribes to indulge in--of politically\nsubduing them to the king in Zion. Jehovah will arbitrate between\nthem, and the result shall be the institution of a great peace, with\nno special political privilege to Israel, unless this be understood\nin ver. 5, which speaks of such security to life as was impossible,\nat that time at least, in all borderlands of Israel. But among the\nheathen themselves there will be a resting from war: the factions\nand ferocities of that wild Semitic world, which Amos so vividly\ncharacterised,[874] shall cease. In all this there is nothing beyond\nthe possibility of suggestion by the circumstances of the eighth\ncentury or by the spirit of its prophecy.\n\nA prophet speaks:--\n\n _And it shall come to pass in the issue of the days,_[875]\n _That the Mount of the House of Jehovah shall be established on the\n tops_[876] _of the mountains,_\n _And lifted shall it be above the hills,_\n _And peoples shall flow to it,_\n _And many nations shall go and say:_\n \"_Come, and let us up to the Mount of Jehovah,_\n _And to the House of the God of Jacob,_\n _That He may teach us of His ways,_\n _And we will walk in His paths._\"\n _For from Zion goeth forth the law,_\n _And the word of Jehovah from out of Jerusalem!_\n _And He shall judge between many peoples,_\n _And decide_[877] _for strong nations far and wide;_[878]\n _And they shall hammer their swords into ploughshares,_\n _And their spears into pruning-hooks:_\n _They shall not lift up, nation against nation, a sword,_\n _And they shall not any more learn war._\n _Every man shall dwell under his vine_\n _And under his fig-tree,_\n _And none shall make afraid;_\n _For the mouth of Jehovah of Hosts has spoken._\n\nWhat connection this last verse is intended to have with the preceding\nis not quite obvious. It may mean that every family among the Gentiles\nshall dwell in peace; or, as suggested above, that with the voluntary\ndisarming of the surrounding heathendom, Israel herself shall dwell\nsecure, in no fear of border raids and slave-hunting expeditions, with\nwhich especially Micah's Shephelah and other borderlands were familiar.\nThe verse does not occur in Isaiah's quotation of the three which\nprecede it. We can scarcely suppose, fain though we may be to do so,\nthat Micah added the verse in order to exhibit the future correction\nof the evils he has been deploring in chap. iii.: the insecurity of\nthe householder in Israel before the unscrupulous land-grabbing of the\nwealthy. Such are not the evils from which this passage prophesies\nredemption. It deals only, like the first oracles of Amos, with the\nrelentlessness and ferocity of the heathen: under Jehovah's arbitrament\nthese shall be at peace, and whether among themselves or in Israel,\nhitherto so exposed to their raids, men shall dwell in unalarmed\npossession of their houses and fields. Security from war, not from\nsocial tyranny, is what is promised.\n\nThe following verse (5) gives in a curious way the contrast of the\npresent to that future in which all men will own the sway of one God.\n_For_ at the present time _all the nations are walking each in the\nname of his God, but we go in the name of Jehovah for ever and aye_.\n\nTo which vision, complete in itself, there has been added by another\nhand, of what date we cannot tell, a further effect of God's blessed\ninfluence. To peace among men shall be added healing and redemption,\nthe ingathering of the outcast and the care of the crippled.\n\n _In that day--'tis the oracle of Jehovah--I will gather the halt,_\n _And the cast-off I will bring in, and all that I have afflicted;_\n _And I will make the halt for a Remnant,_[879]\n _And her that was weakened_[880] _into a strong people,_\n _And Jehovah shall reign over them_\n _In the Mount of Zion from now and for ever._\n\nWhatever be the origin of the separate oracles which compose this\npassage (iv. 1-7), they form as they now stand a beautiful whole,\nrising from Peace through Freedom to Love. They begin with obedience\nto God and they culminate in the most glorious service which God or\nman may undertake, the service of saving the lost. See how the Divine\nspiral ascends. We have, first, Religion the centre and origin of\nall, compelling the attention of men by its historical evidence of\njustice and righteousness. We have the world's willingness to learn\nof it. We have the results in the widening brotherhood of nations,\nin universal Peace, in Labour freed from War, and with none of her\nresources absorbed by the conscriptions and armaments which in our\ntimes are deemed necessary for enforcing peace. We have the universal\ndiffusion and security of Property, the prosperity and safety of the\nhumblest home. And, finally, we have this free strength and wealth\ninspired by the example of God Himself to nourish the broken and to\ngather in the forwandered.\n\nSuch is the ideal world, seen and promised two thousand five hundred\nyears ago, out of as real an experience of human sin and failure as\never mankind awoke to. Are we nearer the Vision to-day, or does it\nstill hang upon time's horizon, that line which seems so stable from\nevery seer's point of view, but which moves from the generations as\nfast as they travel to it?\n\nSo far from this being so, there is much in the Vision that is not\nonly nearer us than it was to the Hebrew prophets, and not only\nabreast of us, but actually achieved and behind us, as we live and\nstrive still onward. Yes, brothers, actually behind us! History\nhas in part fulfilled the promised influence of religion upon the\nnations. The Unity of God has been owned, and the civilised peoples\nbow to the standards of justice and of mercy first revealed from\nMount Zion. _Many nations_ and _powerful nations_ acknowledge the\narbitrament of the God of the Bible. We have had revealed that High\nFatherhood of which every family in heaven and earth is named; and\nwherever that is believed the brotherhood of men is confessed. We\nhave seen Sin, that profound discord in man and estrangement from\nGod, of which all human hatreds and malices are the fruit, atoned\nfor and reconciled by a Sacrifice in face of which human pride and\npassion stand abashed. The first part of the Vision is fulfilled.\n_The nations stream to the God of Jerusalem and His Christ._ And\nthough to-day our Peace be but a paradox, and the \"Christian\" nations\nstand still from war not in love, but in fear of one another, there\nare in every nation an increasing number of men and women, with\ngrowing influence, who, without being fanatics for peace, or blind\nto the fact that war may be a people's duty in fulfilment of its own\ndestiny or in relief of the enslaved, do yet keep themselves from\nfoolish forms of patriotism, and by their recognition of each other\nacross all national differences make sudden and unconsidered war\nmore and more of an impossibility. I write this in the sound of that\ncall to stand upon arms which broke like thunder upon our Christmas\npeace; but, amid all the ignoble jealousies and hot rashness which\nprevail, how the air, burned clean by that first electric discharge,\nhas filled with the determination that war shall not happen in the\ninterests of mere wealth or at the caprice of a tyrant! God help us\nto use this peace for the last ideals of His prophet! May we see, not\nthat of which our modern peace has been far too full, mere freedom\nfor the wealth of the few to increase at the expense of the mass of\nmankind. May our Peace mean the gradual disarmament of the nations,\nthe increase of labour, the diffusion of property, and, above all,\nthe redemption of the waste of the people and the recovery of our\noutcasts. Without this, peace is no peace; and better were war\nto burn out by its fierce fires those evil humours of our secure\ncomfort, which render us insensible to the needy and the fallen at\nour side. Without the redemptive forces at work which Christ brought\nto earth, peace is no peace; and the cruelties of war, that slay and\nmutilate so many, are as nothing to the cruelties of a peace which\nleaves us insensible to the outcasts and the perishing, of whom there\nare so many even in our civilisation.\n\nOne application of the prophecy may be made at this moment. We are\ntold by those who know best and have most responsibility in the\nmatter that an ancient Church and people of Christ are being left a\nprey to the wrath of an infidel tyrant, not because Christendom is\nwithout strength to compel him to deliver, but because to use the\nstrength, would be to imperil the peace, of Christendom. It is an\nignoble peace which cannot use the forces of redemption, and with the\ncry of Armenia in our ears the Unity of Europe is but a mockery.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[873] See above, pp. 365 ff.\n\n[874] See above, Chap. VII.\n\n[875] \u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea is the hindmost, furthest, ultimate, whether of space\n(Psalm cxxxix. 9: \"the uttermost part of the sea\"), or of time (Deut.\nxi. 12: \"the end of the year\"). It is the end as compared with the\nbeginning, the sequel with the start, the future with the present\n(Job xlii. 12). In Proverbs it is chiefly used in the moral sense\nof issue or result. But it chiefly occurs in the phrase used here,\n\u05d4\u05d9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd \u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea, not \"the latter days,\" as A.V., nor ultimate days,\nfor in these phrases lurks the idea of time having an end, but the\n_after-days_ (Cheyne), or, better still, the _issue of the days_.\n\n[876] LXX.\n\n[877] Or _arbitrate_.\n\n[878] Literally: \"up to far away.\"\n\n[879] That which shall abide and be the stock of the future.\n\n[880] LXX. _cast off_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVIII\n\n _THE KING TO COME_\n\n MICAH iv. 8-v\n\n\nWhen a people has to be purged of long injustice, when some high aim\nof liberty or of order has to be won, it is remarkable how often the\ndrama of revolution passes through three acts. There is first the\nperiod of criticism and of vision, in which men feel discontent,\ndream of new things, and put their hopes into systems: it seems then\nas if the future were to come of itself. But often a catastrophe,\nrelevant or irrelevant, ensues: the visions pale before a vast\nconflagration, and poet, philosopher and prophet disappear under\nthe feet of a mad mob of wreckers. Yet this is often the greatest\nperiod of all, for somewhere in the midst of it a strong character\nis forming, and men, by the very anarchy, are being taught, in\npreparation for him, the indispensableness of obedience and loyalty.\nWith their chastened minds he achieves the third act, and fulfils all\nof the early vision that God's ordeal by fire has proved worthy to\nsurvive. Thus history, when distraught, rallies again upon the Man.\n\nTo this law the prophets of Israel only gradually gave expression. We\nfind no trace of it among the earliest of them; and in the essential\nfaith of all there was much which predisposed them against the\nconviction of its necessity. For, on the one hand, the seers were so\nfilled with the inherent truth and inevitableness of their visions,\nthat they described these as if already realised; there was no room\nfor a great figure to rise before the future, for with a rush the\nfuture was upon them. On the other hand, it was ever a principle of\nprophecy that God is able to dispense with human aid. \"In presence of\nthe Divine omnipotence all secondary causes, all interposition on the\npart of the creature, fall away.\"[881] The more striking is it that\nbefore long the prophets should have begun, not only to look for a\nMan, but to paint him as the central figure of their hopes. In Hosea,\nwho has no such promise, we already see the instinct at work. The age\nof revolution which he describes is cursed by its want of men: there\nis no great leader of the people sent from God; those who come to the\nfront are the creatures of faction and party; there is no king from\nGod.[882] How different it had been in the great days of old, when\nGod had ever worked for Israel through some man--a Moses, a Gideon, a\nSamuel, but especially a David. Thus memory equally with the present\ndearth of personalities prompted to a great desire, and with passion\nIsrael waited for a Man. The hope of the mother for her firstborn,\nthe pride of the father in his son, the eagerness of the woman for\nher lover, the devotion of the slave to his liberator, the enthusiasm\nof soldiers for their captain--unite these noblest affections of\nthe human heart and you shall yet fail to reach the passion and the\nglory with which prophecy looked for the King to Come. Each age, of\ncourse, expected him in the qualities of power and character needed\nfor its own troubles, and the ideal changed from glory unto glory.\nFrom valour and victory in war, it became peace and good government,\ncare for the poor and the oppressed, sympathy with the sufferings of\nthe whole people, but especially of the righteous among them, with\nfidelity to the truth delivered unto the fathers, and, finally, a\nconscience for the people's sin, a bearing of their punishment and\na travail for their spiritual redemption. But all these qualities\nand functions were gathered upon an individual--a Victor, a King, a\nProphet, a Martyr, a Servant of the Lord.\n\nMicah stands among the first, if he is not the very first, who thus\nfocussed the hopes of Israel upon a great Redeemer; and his promise\nof Him shares all the characteristics just described. In his book it\nlies next a number of brief oracles with which we are unable to trace\nits immediate connection. They differ from it in style and rhythm:\nthey are in verse, while it seems to be in prose. They do not appear\nto have been uttered along with it. But they reflect the troubles out\nof which the Hero is expected to emerge, and the deliverance which\nHe shall accomplish, though at first they picture the latter without\nany hint of Himself. They apparently describe an invasion which is\nactually in course, rather than one which is near and inevitable; and\nif so they can only date from Sennacherib's campaign against Judah\nin 701 B.C. Jerusalem is in siege, standing alone in the land,[883]\nlike one of those solitary towers with folds round them which were\nbuilt here and there upon the border pastures of Israel for defence\nof the flock against the raiders of the desert.[884] The prophet sees\nthe possibility of Zion's capitulation, but the people shall leave\nher only for their deliverance elsewhere. Many are gathered against\nher, but he sees them as sheaves upon the floor for Zion to thresh.\nThis oracle (vv. 11-13) cannot, of course, have been uttered at the\nsame time as the previous one, but there is no reason why the same\nprophet should not have uttered both at different periods. Isaiah had\nprospects of the fate of Jerusalem which differ quite as much.[885]\nOnce more (ver. 14) the blockade is established. Israel's ruler is\nhelpless, _smitten on the cheek by the foe_.[886] It is to this last\npicture that the promise of the Deliverer is attached.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _But thou, O Tower of the Flock,_\n _Hill of the daughter of Zion,_\n _To thee shall arrive the former rule,_\n _And the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Zion._\n _Now wherefore criest thou so loud?\n Is there no king in thee,[887] or is thy counsellor perished,_\n _That throes have seized thee like a woman in childbirth?_\n _Quiver and writhe, daughter of Zion, like one in childbirth:_\n _For now must thou forth from the city,_\n _And encamp on the field (and come unto Babel);_[888]\n _There shalt thou be rescued,_\n _There shall Jehovah redeem thee from the hand of thy foes!_\n\n _And now gather against thee many nations, that say,_\n \"_Let her be violate, that our eyes may fasten on Zion!_\"\n _But they know not the plans of Jehovah,_\n _Nor understand they His counsel,_\n _For He hath gathered them in like sheaves to the floor._\n _Up and thresh, O daughter of Zion!_\n _For thy horns will I turn into iron,_\n _And thy hoofs will I turn into brass;_\n _And thou wilt beat down many nations,_\n _And devote to Jehovah their spoil,_\n _And their wealth to the Lord of all earth._\n\n _Now press thyself together, thou daughter of pressure_:[889]\n The foe _hath set a wall around us,_\n _With a rod they smite on the cheek Israel's regent_!\n _But thou, Beth-Ephrath,_[890] _smallest among the thousands_[891] _of\n Judah,_\n _From thee unto Me shall come forth the Ruler to be in Israel!_\n _Yea, of old are His goings forth, from the days of long ago!_\n _Therefore shall He suffer them till the time that one bearing shall\n have born._[892]\n (_Then the rest of His brethren shall return with the children of\n Israel._)[893]\n _And He shall stand and shepherd His flock_[894] _in the strength of\n Jehovah,_\n _In the pride of the name of His God._\n _And they shall abide!_\n _For now is He great to the ends of the earth._\n _And Such an One shall be our Peace._[895]\n\nBethlehem was the birthplace of David, but when Micah says that the\nDeliverer shall emerge from her he does not only mean what Isaiah\naffirms by his promise of a rod from the stock of Jesse, that the\nKing to Come shall spring from the one great dynasty in Judah. Micah\nmeans rather to emphasise the rustic and popular origin of the\nMessiah, _too small to be among the thousands of Judah_. David, the\nson of Jesse the Bethlehemite, was a dearer figure than Solomon son\nof David the King. He impressed the people's imagination, because he\nhad sprung from themselves, and in his lifetime had been the popular\nrival of an unlovable despot. Micah himself was the prophet of the\ncountry as distinct from the capital, of the peasants as against the\nrich who oppressed them. When, therefore, he fixed upon Bethlehem as\nthe Messiah's birthplace, he doubtless desired, without departing\nfrom the orthodox hope in the Davidic dynasty, to throw round its new\nrepresentative those associations which had so endeared to the people\ntheir father-monarch. The shepherds of Judah, that strong source of\nundefiled life from which the fortunes of the state and prophecy\nitself had ever been recuperated, should again send forth salvation.\nHad not Micah already declared that, after the overthrow of the\ncapital and the rulers, the glory of Israel should come to Adullam,\nwhere of old David had gathered its soiled and scattered fragments?\n\nWe may conceive how such a promise would affect the crushed peasants\nfor whom Micah wrote. A Saviour, who was one of themselves, not\nborn up there in the capital, foster-brother of the very nobles who\noppressed them, but born among the people, sharer of their toils and\nof their wrongs!--it would bring hope to every broken heart among the\ndisinherited poor of Israel. Yet meantime, be it observed, this was a\npromise, not for the peasants only, but for the whole people. In the\npresent danger of the nation the class disputes are forgotten, and the\nhopes of Israel gather upon their Hero for a common deliverance from\nthe foreign foe. _Such an One shall be our peace._ But in the peace He\nis _to stand and shepherd His flock_, conspicuous and watchful. The\ncountry-folk knew what such a figure meant to themselves for security\nand weal on the land of their fathers. Heretofore their rulers had not\nbeen shepherds, but thieves and robbers.\n\nWe can imagine the contrast which such a vision must have offered to\nthe fancies of the false prophets. What were they beside this? Deity\ndescending in fire and thunder, with all the other features of the\nancient Theophanies that had now become so much cant in the mouths\nof mercenary traditionalists. Besides those, how sane was this, how\nfooted upon the earth, how practical, how popular in the best sense!\n\nWe see, then, the value of Micah's prophecy for his own day. Has\nit also any value for ours--especially in that aspect of it which\nmust have appealed to the hearts of those for whom chiefly Micah\narose? \"Is it wise to paint the Messiah, to paint Christ, so much as\na working-man? Is it not much more to our purpose to remember the\ngeneral fact of His humanity, by which He is able to be Priest and\nBrother to all classes, high and low, rich and poor, the noble and\nthe peasant alike? Is not the Man of Sorrows a much wider name than\nthe Man of Labour?\" Let us answer these questions.\n\nThe value of such a prophecy of Christ lies in the correctives which\nit supplies to the Christian apocalypse and theology. Both of these\nhave raised Christ to a throne too far above the actual circumstance\nof His earthly ministry and the theatre of His eternal sympathies.\nWhether enthroned in the praises of heaven, or by scholasticism\nrelegated to an ideal and abstract humanity, Christ is lifted away\nfrom touch with the common people. But His lowly origin was a fact.\nHe sprang from the most democratic of peoples. His ancestor was a\nshepherd, and His mother a peasant girl. He Himself was a carpenter:\nat home, as His parables show, in the fields and the folds and the\nbarns of His country; with the servants of the great houses, with\nthe unemployed in the market; with the woman in the hovel seeking\none piece of silver, with the shepherd on the moors seeking the lost\nsheep. _The poor had the gospel preached to them; and the common\npeople heard Him gladly._ As the peasants of Jud\u00e6a must have listened\nto Micah's promise of His origin among themselves with new hope and\npatience, so in the Roman empire the religion of Jesus Christ was\nwelcomed chiefly, as the Apostles and the Fathers bear witness, by\nthe lowly and the labouring of every nation. In the great persecution\nwhich bears his name, the Emperor Domitian heard that there were two\nrelatives alive of this Jesus whom so many acknowledged as their\nKing, and he sent for them that he might put them to death. But when\nthey came, he asked them to hold up their hands, and seeing these\nbrown and chapped with toil, he dismissed the men, saying, \"From such\nslaves we have nothing to fear.\" Ah but, Emperor! it is just the\nhorny hands of this religion that thou and thy gods have to fear! Any\ncynic or satirist of thy literature from Celsus onwards could have\ntold thee that it was by men who worked with their hands for their\ndaily bread, by domestics, artisans and all manner of slaves, that\nthe power of this King should spread, which meant destruction to thee\nand thine empire! _From little Bethlehem came forth the Ruler_, and\n_now He is great to the ends of the earth_.\n\nThere follows upon this prophecy of the Shepherd a curious fragment\nwhich divides His office among a number of His order, though the\ngrammar returns towards the end to One. The mention of Assyria stamps\nthis oracle also as of the eighth century. Mark the refrain which\nopens and closes it.[896]\n\n _When Assh\u00fbr cometh into our land,_\n _And when he marcheth on our borders,_[897]\n _Then shall we raise against him seven shepherds_\n _And eight princes of men._\n _And they shall shepherd Assh\u00fbr with a sword,_\n _And Nimrod's land with her own bare blades_\n _And He shall deliver from Assh\u00fbr,_\n _When he cometh into our land._\n _And marcheth upon our borders._\n\nThere follows an oracle in which there is no evidence of Micah's hand\nor of his times; but if it carries any proof of a date, it seems a\nlate one.\n\n _And the remnant of Jacob shall be among many peoples_\n _Like the dew from Jehovah,_\n _Like showers upon grass,_\n _Which wait not for a man,_\n _Nor tarry for the children of men._\n _And the remnant of Jacob_ (_among nations_,) _among many peoples,_\n _Shall be like the lion among the beasts of the jungle,_\n _Like a young lion among the sheepfolds,_\n _Who, when he cometh by, treadeth and teareth,_\n _And none may deliver._\n _Let thine hand be high on thine adversaries,_\n _And all thine enemies be cut off!_\n\nFinally in this section we have an oracle full of the notes we had\nfrom Micah in the first two chapters. It explains itself. Compare\nMicah ii. and Isaiah ii.\n\n _And it shall be in that day--'tis the oracle of Jehovah--_\n _That I will cut off thy horses from the midst of thee,_\n _And I will destroy thy chariots;_\n _That I will cut off the cities of thy land,_\n _And tear down all thy fortresses,_\n _And I will cut off thine enchantments from thy hand,_\n _And thou shall have no more soothsayers;_\n _And I will cut off thine images and thy pillars from the midst of\n thee,_\n _And thou shall not bow down any more to the work of thy hands;_\n _And I will uproot thine Asheras from the midst of thee,_\n _And will destroy thine idols._\n _So shall I do, in My wrath and Mine anger,_\n _Vengeance to the nations, who have not known Me._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[881] Schultz, _A. T. Theol._, p. 722.\n\n[882] See above, pp. 276 ff.\n\n[883] Wellhausen declares that this is unsuitable to the position\nof Jerusalem in the eighth century, and virtually implies her ruin\nand desolation. But, on the contrary, it is not so: Jerusalem is\nstill standing, though alone (cf. the similar figure in Isa. i.).\nConsequently the contradiction which Wellhausen sees between this\neighth verse and vv. 9, 10, does not exist. He grants that the latter\nmay belong to the time of Sennacherib's invasion--unless it be a\n_vaticinium post eventum_!\n\n[884] See above, p. 32.\n\n[885] This in answer to Wellhausen, who thinks the two oracles\nincompatible, and that the second one is similar to the\neschatological prediction common from Ezekiel onwards. Jerusalem,\nhowever, is surely still standing.\n\n[886] Even Wellhausen agrees that this verse is most suitably dated\nfrom the time of Micah.\n\n[887] Those who maintain the exilic date understand by this Jehovah\nHimself. In any case it may be He who is meant.\n\n[888] The words in parenthesis are perhaps a gloss.\n\n[889] Uncertain.\n\n[890] The name Bethlehem is probably a later insertion. I read with\nHitzig and others \u05d4\u05e6\u05e2\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d0\u05e4\u05e8\u05ea, and omit \u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05ea.\n\n[891] Smallest form of district: cf. English _hundreds_.\n\n[892] Cf. the prophecy of Immanuel, Isa. vii.\n\n[893] This seems like a later insertion: it disturbs both sense and\nrhythm.\n\n[894] So LXX.\n\n[895] Take this clause from ver. 4 and the following oracle and put\nit with ver. 3.\n\n[896] Wellhausen alleges in the numbers another trace of the late\nApocalyptic writings--but this is not conclusive.\n\n[897] So LXX. Cf. the refrain at the close.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIX\n\n _THE REASONABLENESS OF TRUE RELIGION_\n\n MICAH vi. 1-8.\n\n\nWe have now reached a passage from which all obscurities of date\nand authorship[898] disappear before the transparence and splendour\nof its contents. \"These few verses,\" says a great critic, \"in\nwhich Micah sets forth the true essence of religion, may raise\na well-founded title to be counted as the most important in the\nprophetic literature. Like almost no others, they afford us an\ninsight into the innermost nature of the religion of Israel, as\ndelivered by the prophets.\"\n\nUsually it is only the last of the verses upon which the admiration of\nthe reader is bestowed: _What doth the Lord require of thee, O man,\nbut to do justice and love mercy and walk humbly with thy God?_ But in\ntruth the rest of the passage differeth not in glory; the wonder of it\nlies no more in its peroration than in its argument as a whole.\n\nThe passage is cast in the same form as the opening chapter of the\nbook--that of an Argument or Debate between the God of Israel and His\npeople, upon the great theatre of Nature. The heart must be dull that\ndoes not leap to the Presences before which the trial is enacted.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Hear ye now that which Jehovah is saying;_\n _Arise, contend before the mountains,_\n _And let the hills hear thy voice!_\n _Hear, O mountains, the Lord's Argument,_\n _And ye, the everlasting! foundations of earth!_\n\nThis is not mere scenery. In all the moral questions between God and\nman, the prophets feel that Nature is involved. Either she is called\nas a witness to the long history of their relations to each other, or\nas sharing God's feeling of the intolerableness of the evil which men\nhave heaped upon her, or by her droughts and floods and earthquakes\nas the executioner of their doom. It is in the first of these\ncapacities that the prophet in this passage appeals to the mountains\nand eternal foundations of earth. They are called, not because they\nare the biggest of existences, but because they are the most full of\nmemories and associations with both parties to the Trial.\n\nThe main idea of the passage, however, is the Trial itself. We have\nseen more than once that the forms of religion which the prophets had\nto combat were those which expressed it mechanically in the form of\nritual and sacrifice, and those which expressed it in mere enthusiasm\nand ecstasy. Between such extremes the prophets insisted that\nreligion was knowledge and that it was conduct--rational intercourse\nand loving duty between God and man. This is what they figure in\ntheir favourite scene of a Debate which is now before us.\n\n _Jehovah hath a Quarrel with His People,_\n _And with Israel He cometh to argue._\n\nTo us, accustomed to communion with the Godhead, as with a Father,\nthis may seem formal and legal. But if we so regard it we do it\nan injustice. The form sprang by revolt against mechanical and\nsensational ideas of religion. It emphasised religion as rational\nand moral, and at once preserved the reasonableness of God and the\nfreedom of man. God spoke with the people whom He had educated: He\npled with them, listened to their statements and questions, and\nproduced His own evidences and reasons. Religion, such a passage as\nthis asserts--religion is not a thing of authority nor of ceremonial\nnor of mere feeling, but of argument, reasonable presentation and\ndebate. Reason is not put out of court: man's freedom is respected;\nand he is not taken by surprise through his fears or his feelings.\nThis sublime and generous conception of religion, which we owe\nfirst of all to the prophets in their contest with superstitious\nand slothful theories of religion that unhappily survive among us,\nwas carried to its climax in the Old Testament by another class of\nwriters. We find it elaborated with great power and beauty in the\nBooks of Wisdom. In these the Divine Reason has emerged from the\nlegal forms now before us, and has become the Associate and Friend of\nMan. The Prologue to the Book of Proverbs tells how Wisdom, fellow of\nGod from the foundation of the world, descends to dwell among men.\nShe comes forth into their streets and markets, she argues and pleads\nthere with an urgency which is equal to the urgency of temptation\nitself. But it is not till the earthly ministry of the Son of God,\nHis arguments with the doctors, His parables to the common people,\nHis gentle and prolonged education of His disciples, that we see the\nreasonableness of religion in all its strength and beauty.\n\nIn that free court of reason in which the prophets saw God and man\nplead together, the subjects were such as became them both. For God\nunfolds no mysteries, and pleads no power, but the debate proceeds\nupon the facts and evidences of life: the appearance of Character\nin history; whether the past be not full of the efforts of Love;\nwhether God had not, as human wilfulness permitted Him, achieved the\nliberation and progress of His people.\n\nGod speaks:--\n\n _My people, what have I done unto thee?_\n _And how have I wearied thee--answer Me?_\n _For I brought thee up from the land of Mi\u1e63raim,_\n _And from the house of slavery I redeemed thee._\n _I sent before thee Moses, Aharon and Miriam._\n _My people, remember now what Balak king of Moab counselled,_\n _And how he was answered by Bala'am, Be'or's son--_\n _So that thou mayest know the righteous deeds of Jehovah._[899]\n\nAlways do the prophets go back to Egypt or the wilderness. There God\nmade the people, there He redeemed them. In lawbook as in prophecy,\nit is the fact of redemption which forms the main ground of His\nappeal. Redeemed by Him, the people are not their own, but His.\nTreated with that wonderful love and patience, like patience and\nlove they are called to bestow upon the weak and miserable beneath\nthem.[900] One of the greatest interpreters of the prophets to our\nown age, Frederick Denison Maurice, has said upon this passage: \"We\ndo not know God till we recognise him as a Deliverer; we do not\nunderstand our own work in the world till we believe we are sent into\nit to carry out His designs for the deliverance of ourselves and the\nrace. The bondage I groan under is a bondage of the will. God is\nemphatically the Redeemer of the will. It is in that character He\nreveals Himself to us. We could not think of God at all as the God,\nthe living God, if we did not regard Him as such a Redeemer. But if\nof my will, then of all wills: sooner or later I am convinced He will\nbe manifested as the Restorer, Regenerator--not of something else,\nbut of this--of the fallen spirit that is within us.\"\n\nIn most of the controversies which the prophets open between God and\nman, the subject on the side of the latter is his sin. But that is\nnot so here. In the controversy which opens the Book of Micah the\nargument falls upon the transgressions of the people, but here upon\ntheir sincere though mistaken methods of approaching God. There God\ndeals with dull consciences, but here with darkened and imploring\nhearts. In that case we had rebels forsaking the true God for idols,\nbut here are earnest seekers after God, who have lost their way and\nare weary. Accordingly, as indignation prevailed there, here prevails\npity; and though formally this be a controversy under the same legal\nform as before, the passage breathes tenderness and gentleness from\nfirst to last. By this as well as by the recollections of the ancient\nhistory of Israel we are reminded of the style of Hosea. But there is\nno expostulation, as in his book, with the people's continued devotion\nto ritual. All that is past, and a new temper prevails. Israel have at\nlast come to feel the vanity of the exaggerated zeal with which Amos\npictures them exceeding the legal requirements of sacrifice;[901] and\nwith a despair, sufficiently evident in the superlatives which they\nuse, they confess the futility and weariness of the whole system, even\nin the most lavish and impossible forms of sacrifice. What then remains\nfor them to do? The prophet answers with the beautiful words, that\nexpress an ideal of religion to which no subsequent century has ever\nbeen able to add either grandeur or tenderness.\n\nThe people speak:--\n\n _Wherewithal shall I come before Jehovah,_\n _Shall I bow myself to God the Most High?_\n _Shall I come before Him with burnt-offerings,_\n _With calves of one year?_\n _Will Jehovah be pleased with thousands of rams,_\n _With myriads of rivers of oil?_\n _Shall I give my firstborn for a guilt-offering,_[902]\n _The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?_\n\nThe prophet answers:--\n\n _He hath shown thee, O man, what is good;_\n _And what is the LORD seeking from thee,_\n _But to do justice and love mercy,_\n _And humbly_[903] _to walk with thy God?_\n\nThis is the greatest saying of the Old Testament; and there is only\none other in the New which excels it:--\n\n _Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give\n you rest._\n _Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in\n heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls._\n _For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[898] See above, pp. 369 ff.\n\n[899] Omitted from the above is the strange clause _from Shittim to\nGilgal_, which appears to be a gloss.\n\n[900] See the passages on the subject in Professor Harper's work on\nDeuteronomy in this series.\n\n[901] See above, p. 161.\n\n[902] See above, p. 370, on the futility of the argument which\nbecause of this line would put the whole passage in Manasseh's reign.\n\n[903] This word \u05d4\u05e6\u05e0\u05e2 is only once used again, in Prov. xi. 2, in\nanother grammatical form, where also it might mean _humbly_. But the\nroot-meaning is evidently _in secret_, or _secretly_ (cf. the Aram.\n\u05e6\u05e0\u05e2, to be hidden; \u05e6\u05e0\u05d9\u05e2, one who lives noiselessly, humble, pious; in\nthe feminine of a bride who is modest); and it is uncertain whether\nwe should not take that sense here.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXX\n\n _THE SIN OF THE SCANT MEASURE_\n\n MICAH vi. 9-vii. 6.\n\n\nThe state of the text of Micah vi. 9-vii. 6 is as confused as the\ncondition of society which it describes: it is difficult to get\nreason, and impossible to get rhyme, out of the separate clauses. We\nhad best give it as it stands, and afterwards state the substance\nof its doctrine, which, in spite of the obscurity of details, is,\nas so often happens in similar cases, perfectly clear and forcible.\nThe passage consists of two portions, which may not originally have\nbelonged to each other, but which seem to reflect the same disorder\nof civic life, with the judgment that impends upon it.[904] In the\nfirst of them, vi. 9-16, the prophet calls for attention to the\nvoice of God, which describes the fraudulent life of Jerusalem, and\nthe evils He is bringing on her. In the second, vii. 1-6, Jerusalem\nbemoans her corrupt society; but perhaps we hear her voice only in\nver. 1, and thereafter the prophet's.\n\nThe prophet speaks:--\n\n _Hark! Jehovah crieth to the city!_\n ('_Tis salvation to fear Thy Name!_)[905]\n _Hear ye, O tribe and council of the city!_ (?)[906]\n\nGod speaks:--\n\n ... in _the house of the wicked treasures of wickedness,_\n _And the scant measure accursed!_\n _Can she be pure with the evil balances,_\n _And with the bag of false weights,_\n _Whose rich men are full of violence,_[907]\n _And her citizens speak falsehood,_\n _And their tongue is deceit in their mouth?_\n _But I on My part have begun to plague thee,_\n _To lay_ thee _in ruin because of thy sins._\n _Thou eatest and art not filled,_\n _But thy famine_[908] _is in the very midst of thee!_\n _And_ but _try to remove,_[909] _thou canst not bring off;_\n _And what thou bringest off, I give to the sword._\n _Thou sowest, but never reapest;_\n _Treadest olives, but never anointest with oil,_\n _And must, but not to drink wine!_\n _So thou keepest the statutes of Omri,_[910]\n _And the habits of the house of Ahab,_\n _And walkest in their principles,_\n Only _that I may give thee to ruin,_\n _And her inhabitants for sport--_\n _Yea, the reproach of the Gentiles_[911] _shall ye bear!_\n\nJerusalem speaks:--\n\n _Woe, woe is me, for I am become like sweepings of harvest,_\n _Like gleanings of the vintage--_\n _Not a cluster to eat_, not _a fig that my soul lusteth after._\n _Perished are the leal from the land,_\n _Of the upright among men there is none:_\n _All of them are lurking for blood;_\n _Every man takes his brother in a net._\n _Their hands are on evil to do it thoroughly._[912]\n _The prince makes requisition,_\n _The judge_ judgeth _for payment,_\n _And the great man he speaketh his lust;_\n _So_ together _they weave it out._\n _The best of them is but a thorn thicket,_[913]\n _The most upright_ worse _than a prickly hedge._[914]\n _The day that thy sentinels_ saw, _thy visitation, draweth on;_\n _Now is their havoc_[915] _come!_\n _Trust not any friend! Rely on no confidant!_\n _From her that lies in thy bosom guard the gates of thy mouth._\n _For son insulteth father, daughter is risen against her mother,\n daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;_\n _And the enemies of a man are the men of his house._\n\nMicah, though the prophet of the country and stern critic of its\nlife, characterised Jerusalem herself as the centre of the nation's\nsins. He did not refer to idolatry alone, but also to the irreligion\nof the politicians, and the cruel injustice of the rich in the\ncapital. The poison which weakened the nation's blood had found\nits entrance to their veins at the very heart. There had the evil\ngathered which was shaking the state to a rapid dissolution.\n\nThis section of the Book of Micah, whether it be by that prophet\nor not, describes no features of Jerusalem's life which were not\npresent in the eighth century; and it may be considered as the more\ndetailed picture of the evils he summarily denounced. It is one of\nthe most poignant criticisms of a commercial community which have\never appeared in literature. In equal relief we see the meanest\ninstruments and the most prominent agents of covetousness and\ncruelty--the scant measure, the false weights, the unscrupulous\nprince and the venal judge. And although there are some sins\ndenounced which are impossible in our civilisation, yet falsehood,\nsqualid fraud, pitilessness of the everlasting struggle for life are\nexposed exactly as we see them about us to-day. Through the prophet's\nancient and often obscure eloquence we feel just those shocks and\nsharp edges which still break everywhere through our Christian\ncivilisation. Let us remember, too, that the community addressed by\nthe prophet was, like our own, professedly religious.\n\nThe most widespread sin with which the prophet charges Jerusalem in\nthese days of her commercial activity is falsehood: _Her inhabitants\nspeak lies, and their tongue is deceit in their mouth._ In Mr.\nLecky's _History of European Morals_ we find the opinion that \"the\none respect in which the growth of industrial life has exercised a\nfavourable influence on morals has been in the promotion of truth.\" The\ntribute is just, but there is another side to it. The exigencies of\ncommerce and industry are fatal to most of the conventional pretences,\ninsincerities and flatteries, which tend to grow up in all kinds of\nsociety. In commercial life, more perhaps than in any other, a man\nis taken, and has to be taken, in his inherent worth. Business, the\nlife which is called _par excellence_ Busy-ness, wears off every\nmask, all false veneer and unction, and leaves no time for the cant\nand parade which are so prone to increase in all other professions.\nMoreover the soul of commerce is credit. Men have to show that they\ncan be trusted before other men will traffic with them, at least upon\nthat large and lavish scale on which alone the great undertakings of\ncommerce can be conducted. When we look back upon the history of trade\nand industry, and see how they have created an atmosphere in which\nmen must ultimately seem what they really are; how they have of their\nneeds replaced the jealousies, subterfuges, intrigues, which were once\ndeemed indispensable to the relations of men of different peoples, by\nlarge international credit and trust; how they break through the false\nconventions that divide class from class, we must do homage to them, as\namong the greatest instruments of the truth which maketh free.\n\nBut to all this there is another side. If commerce has exploded\nso much conventional insincerity, it has developed a species of\nthe genus which is quite its own. In our days nothing can lie like\nan advertisement. The saying \"the tricks of the trade\" has become\nproverbial. Every one knows that the awful strain and harassing of\ncommercial life is largely due to the very amount of falseness that\nexists. The haste to be rich, the pitiless rivalry and competition,\nhave developed a carelessness of the rights of others to the truth\nfrom ourselves, with a capacity for subterfuge and intrigue, which\nreminds one of nothing so much as that state of barbarian war out of\nwhich it was the ancient glory of commerce to have assisted mankind\nto rise. Are the prophet's words about Jerusalem too strong for large\nportions of our own commercial communities? Men who know these best\nwill not say that they are. But let us cherish rather the powers\nof commerce which make for truth. Let us tell men who engage in\ntrade that there are none for whom it is more easy to be clean and\nstraight; that lies, whether of action or of speech, only increase\nthe mental expense and the moral strain of life; and that the health,\nthe capacity, the foresight, the opportunities of a great merchant\ndepend ultimately on his resolve to be true and on the courage with\nwhich he sticks to the truth.\n\nOne habit of falseness on which the prophet dwells is the use of\nunjust scales and short measures. The _stores_ or fortunes of his\nday are _stores of wickedness_, because they have been accumulated\nby the use of the _lean ephah_, the _balances of wrong_ and _the\nbag of false weights_. These are evils more common in the East than\nwith us: modern government makes them almost impossible. But, all\nthe same, ours is the sin of the scant measure, and the more so in\nproportion to the greater speed and rivalry of our commercial life.\nThe prophet's name for it, _measure of leanness_, of _consumption_ or\n_shrinkage_, is a proper symbol of all those duties and offices of\nman to man, the full and generous discharge of which is diminished\nby the haste and the grudge of a prevalent selfishness. The speed\nof modern life tends to shorten the time expended on every piece of\nwork, and to turn it out untempered and incomplete. The struggle for\nlife in commerce, the organised rivalry between labour and capital,\nnot only puts every man on his guard against giving any other more\nthan his due, but tempts him to use every opportunity to scamp and\ncurtail his own service and output. You will hear men defend this\nparsimony as if it were a law. They say that business is impossible\nwithout the temper which they call \"sharpness\" or the habit which\nthey call \"cutting it fine.\" But such character and conduct are the\nvery decay of society. The shrinkage of the units must always and\neverywhere mean the disintegration of the mass. A society whose\nmembers strive to keep within their duties is a society which cannot\ncontinue to cohere. Selfishness may be firmness, but it is the\nfirmness of frost, the rigour of death. Only the unselfish excess\nof duty, only the generous loyalty to others, give to society the\ncompactness and indissolubleness of life. Who is responsible for the\nenmity of classes, and the distrust which exists between capital and\nlabour? It is the workman whose one aim is to secure the largest\namount of wages for the smallest amount of work, and who will, in\nhis blind pursuit of that, wreck the whole trade of a town or a\ndistrict; it is the employer who believes he has no duties to his men\nbeyond paying them for their work the least that he can induce them\nto take; it is the customer who only and ever looks to the cheapness\nof an article--procurer in that prostitution of talent to the work\nof scamping which is fast killing art, and joy and all pity for the\nbodies and souls of our brothers. These are the true anarchists and\nbreakers-up of society. On their methods social coherence and harmony\nare impossible. Life itself is impossible. No organism can thrive\nwhose various limbs are ever shrinking in upon themselves. There is\nno life except by living to others.\n\nBut the prophet covers the whole evil when he says that the _pious\nare perished out of the land_. _Pious_ is a translation of despair.\nThe original means the man distinguished by \"\u1e25esedh,\" that word which\nwe have on several occasions translated _leal love_, because it\nimplies not only an affection but loyalty to a relation. And, as the\nuse of the word frequently reminds us, \"\u1e25esedh\" is love and loyalty\nboth to God and to our fellow-men. We need not dissociate these: they\nare one. But here it is the human direction in which the word looks.\nIt means a character which fulfils all the relations of society with\nthe fidelity, generosity and grace, which are the proper affections\nof man to man. Such a character, says the prophet, is perished from\nthe land. Every man now lives for himself, and as a consequence preys\nupon his brother. _They all lie in wait for blood; they hunt every\nman his brother with a net._ This is not murder which the prophet\ndescribes: it is the reckless, pitiless competition of the new\nconditions of life developed in Judah by the long peace and commerce\nof the eighth century. And he carries this selfishness into a very\nstriking figure in ver. 4: _The best of them is as a thorn thicket,\nthe most upright_ worse _than a prickly hedge_. He realises exactly\nwhat we mean by sharpness and sharp-dealing: bristling self-interest,\nall points; splendid in its own defence, but barren of fruit, and\nwithout nest or covert for any life.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[904] See above, pp. 370 ff.\n\n[905] Probably a later parenthesis. The word \u05ea\u05d5\u05e9\u05c1\u05d9\u05d4 is one which,\nunusual in the prophets, the Wisdom literature has made its own Prov.\nii. 7, xviii. 1; Job v. 12, etc. For _Thy_ LXX. read _His_.\n\n[906] Translation of LXX. emended by Wellhausen so as to read \u05d4\u05e2\u05d9\u05e8\n\u05de\u05d5\u05e2\u05d3, the \u05e2\u05d9\u05e8 being obtained by taking and transferring the \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 of\nthe next verse, and relieving that verse of an unusual formation,\nviz. \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 before the interrogative \u05d4\u05d0\u05e9. But for an instance of \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3\npreceding an interrogative see Gen. xix. 12.\n\n[907] The text of the two preceding verses, which is acknowledged to\nbe corrupt, must be corrected by the undoubted 3rd feminine suffix\nin this one--\"_her_ rich men.\" Throughout the reference must be to\nthe city. We ought therefore to change \u05d4\u05d0\u05d6\u05db\u05d4 of ver. 11 into \u05d4\u05ea\u05d6\u05db\u05d4,\nwhich agrees with the LXX. \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. Ver. 10 is more uncertain,\nbut for the same reason that \"the city\" is referred to throughout vv.\n9-12, it is possible that it is the nominative to \u05d6\u05e2\u05d5\u05de\u05d4; translate\n\"cursed with the short measure.\" Again for \u05d0\u05e6\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea LXX. read \u05d0\u05b9\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\n\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05e6\u05b6\u05e8\u05b6\u05ea, to which also the city would be nominative. And this\nsuggests the query whether in the letters \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d4\u05d0\u05e9, that make little\nsense as they stand in the Massoretic Text, there was not originally\nanother feminine participle. The recommendation of a transformation\nof this kind is that it removes the abruptness of the appearance of\nthe 3rd feminine suffix in ver. 12.\n\n[908] The word is found only here. The stem \u05d9\u05d7\u05e9\u05c1 is no doubt the same\nas the Arabic verb wa\u1e25ash, which in Form V. means \"Inami ventre fuit\npr\u00e6 fame; vacuum reliquit stomachum\" (Freytag). In modern colloquial\nArabic wa\u1e25sha means a \"longing for an absent friend.\"\n\n[909] Jussive. The objects removed can hardly be goods, as Hitzig and\nothers infer; for it is to _the sword_ they afterwards fall. They\nmust be persons.\n\n[910] LXX. _Zimri_.\n\n[911] So LXX.; but Heb. _My people_.\n\n[912] Uncertain.\n\n[913] Cf. Prov. xv. 19.\n\n[914] Roorda, by rearranging letters and clauses (some of them\nafter LXX.), and by changing points, gets a reading which may be\nrendered: _For evil are their hands! To do good the prince demandeth\na bribe, and the judge, for the reward of the great, speaketh what\nhe desireth. And they entangle the good more than thorns, and the\nrighteous more than a thorn hedge._\n\n[915] Cf. Isa. xxii. 5.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXI\n\n _OUR MOTHER OF SORROWS_\n\n MICAH vii. 7-20.\n\n\nAfter so stern a charge, so condign a sentence, confession is\nnatural, and, with prayer for forgiveness and praise to the mercy\nof God, it fitly closes the whole book. As we have seen,[916] the\npassage is a cento of several fragments, from periods far apart in\nthe history of Israel. One historical allusion suits best the age of\nthe Syrian wars; another can only refer to the day of Jerusalem's\nruin. In spirit and language the Confessions resemble the prayers of\nthe Exile. The Doxology has echoes of several Scriptures.[917]\n\nBut from these fragments, it may be of many centuries, there rises\nclear the One Essential Figure: Israel, all her secular woes upon\nher; our Mother of Sorrows, at whose knees we learned our first\nprayers of confession and penitence. Other nations have been our\nteachers in art and wisdom and government. But she is our mistress in\npain and in patience, teaching men with what conscience they should\nbear the chastening of the Almighty, with what hope and humility they\nshould wait for their God. Surely not less lovable, but only more\nhuman, that her pale cheeks flush for a moment with the hate of the\nenemy and the assurance of revenge. Her passion is soon gone, for she\nfeels her guilt to be greater; and, seeking forgiveness, her last\nword is what man's must ever be, praise to the grace and mercy of God.\n\nIsrael speaks:--\n\n _But I will look for the LORD,_\n _I will wait for the God of my salvation:_\n _My God will hear me!_\n _Rejoice not, O mine enemy, at me:_\n _If I be fallen, I rise;_\n _If I sit in the darkness, the LORD is a light to me._\n\n _The anger of the LORD will I bear--_\n _For I have sinned against Him--_\n _Until that He take up my quarrel,_\n _And execute my right._\n _He will carry me forth to the light;_\n _I will look on His righteousness:_\n _So shall mine enemy see, and shame cover her,_\n _She that saith unto me, Where is Jehovah thy God?--_\n _Mine eyes shall see her,_\n _Now is she for trampling, like mire in the streets!_\n\nThe prophet[918] responds:--\n\n _A day for the building of thy walls shall that day be!_\n _Broad shall thy border be_[919] _on that day!_\n\n ...[920]_and shall come to thee_\n _From Assyria unto Egypt, and from Egypt to the River,_\n _And to Sea from Sea, and Mountain from Mountain;_[921]\n _Though_[922] _the land be waste on account of her inhabitants,_\n _Because of the fruit of their doings._\n\nAn Ancient Prayer:--\n\n _Shepherd Thy people with Thy staff,_\n _The sheep of Thy heritage dwelling solitarily...._[923]\n _May they pasture in Bashan and Gilead as in days of old!_\n _As in the days when Thou wentest forth from the land of Mi\u1e63raim, give\n us wonders to see!_\n _Nations shall see and despair of all their might;_\n _Their hands to their mouths shall they put,_\n _Their ears shall be deafened._\n _They shall lick the dust like serpents;_\n _Like worms of the ground from their fastnesses,_\n _To Jehovah our God they shall come trembling,_\n _And in fear before Thee!_\n\nA Doxology:--\n\n _Who is a God like to Thee? Forgiving iniquity,_\n _And passing by transgression, to the remnant of His heritage;_\n _He keepeth not hold of His anger for ever,_\n _But One who delighteth in mercy is He;_\n _He will come back, He will pity us,_\n _He will tread underfoot our iniquities--_\n _Yea, Thou wilt cast to the depths of the sea every one of our sins._\n _Thou wilt show faithfulness to Jacob, leal love to Abraham,_\n _As Thou hast sworn to our fathers from the days of yore._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[916] Above, pp. 372 ff.\n\n[917] Cf. with it Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7 (J); Jer. iii. 5, l. 20; Isa.\nlvii. 16; Psalms ciii. 9, cv. 9, 10.\n\n[918] It was a woman who spoke before, the People or the City. But\nthe second personal pronouns to which this reply of the prophet is\naddressed are all masculine. Notice the same change in vi. 9-16\n(above p. 427).\n\n[919] \u05d9\u05e8\u05d7\u05e7\u05be\u05d7\u05e7, Ewald: \"distant the date.\" Notice the assonance. It\nexplains the use of the unusual word for _border_. LXX. _thy border_.\nThe LXX. also takes into ver. 11 (as above) the \u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05d9\u05d5\u05dd of ver. 12.\n\n[920] Something has probably been lost here.\n\n[921] For \u05d4\u05d4\u05e8 read \u05de\u05d4\u05e8.\n\n[922] It is difficult to get sense when translating the conjunction\nin any other way. But these two lines may belong to the following.\n\n[923] The words omitted above are literally _jungle in the midst\nof gardenland_ or _Carmel_. Plausible as it would be to take the\nproper name Carmel here along with Bashan and Gilead (see _Hist.\nGeog._, 338), the connection prefers the common noun _garden_ or\n_gardenland_: translate \"dwelling alone like a bit of jungle in the\nmidst of cultivated land.\" Perhaps the clause needs rearrangement:\n\u05d9\u05e2\u05e8\u05d1\u05ea\u05d5\u05db\u05db\u05e8\u05de\u05dc, with a verb to introduce it. Yet compare \u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05de\u05b4\u05dc\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\n\u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05e8, 2 Kings xix. 23; Isa. xxxvii. 24.\n\n\n\n\n INDEX OF PASSAGES AND TEXTS\n\n\n_A single text will always be found treated in the exposition of the\npassage to which it belongs. Only the other important references\nto it are given in this index. In the second of the columns Roman\nnumerals indicate the chapters, Arabic numerals the pages._\n\n AMOS\n\n i., ii. 62\n\n i. 1 61, 67 f., 69 _n._\n\n i. 2 81, 93, 98\n\n i. 3-ii. VII.\n\n ii. 13 72\n\n iii.-vi. 62 ff.\n\n iii.-iv. 3 62, 63, VIII.\n\n iii. 3-8 81 ff., 89 ff., 196\n\n iii. 7 198\n\n iv. 4-13 IX., Sec. 1; 199 f.\n\n iv. 11 68\n\n iv. 12 197\n\n iv. 13 164, 201 ff.\n\n v. 63; IX., Sec. 2\n\n v. 8, 9 166, 201 ff.\n\n v. 26, 27 108, 170 ff., 204\n\n vi. 63; IX., Sec. 3\n\n vi. 9, 10 IX., Sec. 4\n\n vi. 12 198\n\n vii.-ix. 63 f.\n\n vii.-viii. 4 70; V., Sec. 3\n\n vii. 218\n\n vii. 12 28 f.\n\n vii. 14, 15 27, 74, 76 ff.\n\n viii. 4-ix. 64; X.\n\n viii. 4-14 X., Sec. 1\n\n viii. 8 68, 95, 198\n\n viii. 9 66, 95\n\n ix. 1-6 64; X., Sec. 2\n\n ix. 1 111, 151\n\n ix. 5, 6 201 ff.\n\n ix. 7-15 64; X., Sec. 3\n\n HOSEA\n\n i. 1, _Title_ 215 _n._ 1\n\n i.-iii. 211, 212 ff.; XIV.; XXIII.\n\n i. 7 213 _n._ 1\n\n ii. 1-3 213, 249 _n._ 2\n\n ii. 8 341\n\n ii. 9 335\n\n ii. 10 328\n\n iii. 1 214\n\n iii. 5 214\n\n iv.-xiv. 215 ff.; XV.\n\n iv.-vii. 7 223; XVI.\n\n iv. XVI., Sec. 1\n\n iv. 1 323\n\n iv. 2 320\n\n iv. 4 221 _n._ 4\n\n iv. 4-9 324\n\n iv. 6 320, 326, 330\n\n iv. 9 335\n\n iv. 12-14 241, 282, 323; XXIII.\n\n iv. 15 224\n\n iv. 17 342\n\n v. 1-14 XVI., Sec. 2\n\n v. 5 225, 337 f.\n\n v. 10, 12-14 225\n\n v. 15-vii. 2 XVI., Sec. 3\n\n v. 14-vi. 1 222\n\n vi. 1-4 344\n\n vi. 5 221 _n._ 3\n\n vi. 8, 9 216\n\n vi. 11-vii. 1 222\n\n vii. 3-7 XVI., Sec. 4\n\n vii. 8-x. XVII.\n\n vii. 8-viii. 3 XVII., Sec. 1\n\n vii. 9-11 323, 337\n\n vii. 16 335 _n._ 1\n\n viii. 4-13 XVII., Sec. 2\n\n viii. 4 221 _n._ 4\n\n viii. 5 341\n\n viii. 10 221 _n._ 6\n\n viii. 13 221 _n._ 7\n\n viii. 14 224\n\n ix. 1-9 XVII., Sec. 3\n\n ix. 1 340\n\n ix. 2 221 _n._ 6\n\n ix. 7 28, 222 _n._ 1\n\n ix. 8, 9 222 _n._ 1\n\n ix. 10-17 XVII., Sec. 4; XXIII.\n\n ix. 17 222 _n._ 2\n\n x. XVII., Sec. 5\n\n x. 1, 2 38 _n._ 4\n\n x. 5 221 _n._ 6 (read x. 5); 341, 342\n\n x. 9 327 _n._ 10\n\n x. 11, 12 225, 344 f.\n\n x. 13 221 _n._ 6\n\n x. 14 217 _n._ 5\n\n x. 15 221 _n._ 6\n\n xi. XVIII.\n\n xi. 1 327\n\n xi. 2-4 221 _nn._ 1-4\n\n xi. 5 221 _n._ 4, 336 _n._ 2\n\n xi. 8 XXIII.; 351\n\n xii.-xiv. 1 XIX.\n\n xii. XIX., Sec. 1\n\n xii. 1 225\n\n xii. 2 221 _n._ 6\n\n xii. 3 225\n\n xii. 4, 5 326\n\n xii. 7 345\n\n xii. 8 33\n\n xii. 13, 14 327\n\n xiii.-xiv. 1 XIX., Sec. 2\n\n xiii. 2 342\n\n xiii. 4 203, 226\n\n xiii. 6 327, 330\n\n xiii. 7 330 f.\n\n xiv. 2-10 XX.\n\n xiv. 3 343\n\n xiv. 5 335 _n._ 1\n\n xiv. 6-9 233\n\n MICAH\n\n i. 1, _Title_ 358\n\n i.-iii. 358, 360, 362 ff.\n\n i. 362 f.; XXV.\n\n ii., iii. 363, 364; XXVI.\n\n ii. 12, 13 359, 360, 362, 393 _n._ 1\n\n iii. 14 363 _n._ 2\n\n iv., v. 357, 358, 360, 365 ff.\n\n iv. 1-7 XXVII.\n\n iv. 1-5 358, 365\n\n iv. 5 367\n\n iv. 6-8 358, 367\n\n iv. 8-13 367\n\n iv. 8-v. XXVIII.\n\n iv. 9-14 358, 359\n\n iv. 11-13 358\n\n iv. 14-v. 8 368\n\n v. 8 359\n\n v. 9-14 368\n\n vi., vii. 357, 358, 359, 360, 369\n\n vi. 1-8 369; XXIX.\n\n vi. 9-vii. 6 XXX.\n\n vi. 9-16 370\n\n vii. 1-6 359, 371\n\n vii. 7-20 359, 372 ff.; XXXI.\n\n vii. 11 373\n\n vii. 14-17 373\n\n vii. 18-20 373\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n\nObvious punctuation and spelling errors have been fixed throughout.\n\nInconsistent hyphenation is as in the original.\n\nPage 364: Verse references have been updated to reflect their actual\nreferences.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Book of the Twelve Prophets, Vol. 1: Commonly Called the Minor","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":132396}