p. 181Ladies and Gentlemen,—
We must now be drawing these pleasant meetings to a close—not because the subject is exhausted, but because to all things human there are inevitable limits. Before we say finally “adieu,” I should desire to draw your attention to the powerful illustration of the argument which I have employed, which is found in the case of the prophets as a whole. That argument is, as I may once more remind you, that the things written in the Scriptures could not have been written unless they were true, because none of them are of the class of things in which fiction is ever resorted to in any of its categories, or to which fiction could lend itself for any purpose. I have striven to shew this in the many cases we have had under our review. How obviously must this appear to be the case with the prophets as exhibited to us in Bible narrative. It is not a story that could give any satisfaction, either to the writers or to those for whom it p. 182 was written. It is not a case of heroism in which human pride could glory on their behalf, nor a case in which Jewish patriotism could find any satisfaction as regards the national treatment of them.
Their case is briefly summarized in the statement of the apostle Paul (Heb. xi. 37), that “they wandered about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented: of whom the world was not worthy: they wandered in deserts and in mountains and in dens and in caves of the earth.” Jesus speaks of them under the figure of servants sent by the owner of a vineyard to get the fruits in its season, whom the occupants of the vineyard shamefully handled one after the other, beating some and killing some (Mark xii. 1-5). Their origin, their function, and their treatment are plainly related thus, in the close of Israel’s history: 2 Chron. xxxvi. 15, 16, “All the chief of the priests and the people transgressed very much, . . . and the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling-place. But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against his people, till there was no remedy.”
Most frequently throughout the Scriptures is there an acknowledgement such as Daniel makes (ix. 6), that Israel in their generations had “not hearkened to thy servants, the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land. . . . Neither have we obeyed the voice of the Lord our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets.”
I put it to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, whether it is conceivable that the record of such a state of things p. 183 could have been the work of imagination. It is contrary to the habits of universal fiction, whether in the form of cumulative legend and tradition coming down from far-off times, or in the form of direct and daring invention, to represent the leading teachers of a nation as the victims of the national blindness and stupidity. The tendency of myth is to glorify and not degrade its subjects, especially when the latter process involves the degradation of the people to whom the mythologers belong.
All things considered, it must be felt that the record of the national revolt against the prophets and of the national misusage of them, is proof that the revolt and the misusage happened, since on no other hypothesis can the existence of the record be accounted for. And we have then to consider what caused the revolt and the misusage: upon which we find ourselves in the presence of one of the most powerful evidences of the Divinity of the Bible. Their writings are the all-sufficient explanation. Without exception, they condemned Israel’s ways. The opening verses of Isaiah and the closing portion of Malachi may be taken as an illustration of all.
Here is the very first message of Isaiah: “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the Lord hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider. Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.”
Here are among the last utterances of Malachi: p. 184 “Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. . . . Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. . . . . Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept His ordinances? . . .” (Mal. iii. 7, 9, 14).
The whole of the voluminous writings between, are mainly in the same strain.
Ladies and Gentlemen,—I ask you to ponder this extraordinary phenomenon—of an ancient nation’s preserved literature being in denunciation of its character. I pray you to realize that we are dealing with a matter of fact that has to be accounted for, and not with a matter of fancy or opinion at all. Here is the Bible: it is in your hands—it is in the hands of all nations—and has been there for ages. And this is one of its peculiarities—that the writings of the prophets condemn the nation to which they belonged—condemn them earnestly and long, from generation to generation, at the cost of their lives. As Stephen earnestly said to the Jewish rulers who persecuted the Apostles: “Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Spirit: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have SLAIN THEM which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers” (Acts vii. 51, 53).
Here is no literature of fiction or of fancy. Nothing but the utmost earnestness of fact could have brought such a literature into existence.
And now consider one point more—a strong one. These earnest men, the prophets, who earnestly condemned the ways of Israel, and were one and all put p. 185 out of the way for their pains, were not volunteers in the part they performed. They yielded to compulsion. They were in some cases unwilling and reluctant tools. I am not in this putting forth a theory or expressing an opinion, but only enunciating what you will find to be a matter of fact, calling for explanation. The case of Amos samples the rest: “. . . I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son; but I was an herdman, and a gatherer of sycomore fruit: and the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel” (Amos vii. 14, 15). Jonah fled when ordered to his work (Jonah i. 3). Jeremiah also records that when “the word of the Lord came to him,” appointing him a prophet, he said, “Ah, Lord God! behold; I cannot speak: for I am a child” (Jer. i. 6). The compulsion in the case was a powerful compulsion from without, operating irresistibly from within. It is signally illustrated in the case of Jeremiah, who was disposed to resist the motions of inspiration on account of the unpopular character of the messages it was causing him to utter. “Then I said, I will not make mention of Him, nor speak any more in His name. But His word was in mine heart, as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay” (Jer. xx. 9).
It was, therefore, no empty flourish when the prophets prefaced their messages with the words, “Thus saith the Lord.” It was the declaration of a literal fact, as worded by Nehemiah in his prayer: “THOU testifiedst against them by THY SPIRIT in Thy prophets” (Neh. ix. 30). Some men pretended to be prophets and were not. The Divine definition of them is exact: They “follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing.” “Have ye not seen a p. 186 vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination? Whereas ye say, The Lord saith it, albeit I have not spoken?” (Ezek. xiii. 3-7). We have their condemnation thus: “I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken unto them, yet they prophesied. . . . They speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord.. . . . The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. . . . I am against them. . . . By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed” (Jer. xxiii. 21, 16, 30; xiv. 14, 15). This discrimination of the false from the true prophets, throws a powerful light on the character and actuality of the latter. They were the simple vehicles of the Divine intelligence; they were not purveyors of their own thoughts. Their true position was circumstantially and pathetically illustrated during the siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. Jeremiah’s messages had a disheartening effect on the defenders of the city, and the military men advised his execution. His answer was: “The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard. . . . As for me, behold, I am in your hand: do with me as seemeth good and meet unto you. But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears” (Jer. xxvi. 12-15).
Ladies and Gentlemen,—I earnestly submit to you p. 187 that the mere existence of the prophetic writings, involving all these things, is a proof of the Divine character of the prophets in their work and mission, and therefore of the entire scheme of things to which they stand related, from Moses to Christ. I implore you to follow out the argument to its logical conclusion, and, endorsing the Scriptures as the Word of God, give yourselves to their study, in which you will find great light and peace now, and in the world to come, life everlasting.