Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

that the reign of Jeroboam II. coincides nearly with the period from the death of Ramman-Nirari, King of Assyria, to the accession of Tiglath-Pileser-a period marked, we are told, by a curious inactivity and apparent decadence in the Assyrian rule. In that case, such a mission as that of Jonah is more intelligible than if it had been referred to the reign of one of the great Assyrian warrior kings.

MICAH

The superscription of the prophecy of Micah is confirmed by the evidence of the book itself. He was in part contemporary with Hosea and Amos who prophesied to Israel, and with Isaiah the great teacher of Judah. Thus i. 6 shows that Samaria, which was taken by the Assyrians in the sixth year of Hezekiah, was still untaken; and iii. 12 was, as we know from Jer. xxvi. 18, delivered in the reign of Hezekiah, apparently just before the great reformation. The book falls into three plainly marked divisions-(a) chaps.i.-iii., where sharp judgments are pronounced upon the nation for its sins; (6) chaps. iv., v. Here the threats are followed by the promise of restoration, of peace and blessing. From the little town of Bethlehem the Messiah is to go forth, He Who is 'the peace,' the new King of the house of David; and (c) chaps. vi., vii. Here the utterances are more varied. God remonstrates with His people, and dwells on His goodness to them in the ancient times. To the inquiry of the people as to God's requirements, the answer is given in shortest compass, 'Do justly, and love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God.' Yet how different, the prophet urges, is the present conduct, when, instead of God's law, 'the statutes of Omri are kept,' general corruption prevails, greed and treachery. Still, amid the darkness the light is never lost ; and, spite of all the evil, the prophet breaks out into thanks and praise, 'Thou wilt perform the truth and the mercy, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.'

NAHUM

Of Nahum himself we know nothing, save that he was a native of Elkosh, a place perhaps in Galilee, but more probably in the low-lying country of Judæa. The idea that it was an Assyrian town, not far from the modern Mosul, is a medieval fancy, perhaps due to the belief that none but an eye-witness could have pictured Nineveh with such vividness. The date of the prophecy can be fixed within reasonably narrow limits. On the one hand, we have the reference to the destruction of No-Amon (Thebes) by Assur-Bani-Pal, in or about 663 B.C., and it is perhaps fair to suppose that Nahum prophesied soon after that event, while the startling impression in men's minds was still fresh. In any case, it must have been before the fall of Nineveh in 607-606 B.с.

There is but one subject, one thought, in the prophecy. It is the fall of the bloody city, which had so long lorded it over the nations. The tyranny was such, that there seemed to be a perfect apotheosis of cruelty, and this the Assyrian monuments testify. So much does this one thought fill the prophet's mind, that there is no room even for thankfulness to Jehovah for the deliverance, none for any higher spiritual teaching. Perhaps by-and-by monuments may be discovered which shall tell us the details of the fall of Nineveh. Till then we will echo Dr. M'Curdy's words, 'Who would have thought that the only account vouchsafed to later times of the siege and capture of the great city of Asshur, would be a poetical sketch written beforehand in a petty subject state, nearly a thousand miles from the scene, by the servant of a rival and victorious God!'

A passing remark must be made on the integrity of the book. A recent theory would view i. 2-ii. 2 as an acoustic or alphabetic psalm, and as such of late (post-Exilic) date, which has been prefixed to the genuine prophecy of Nahum. Yet, while in the first half-dozen verses a sort of alphabetic arrangement can be traced, in the verses which follow we need almost a wholesale re-writing to continue the series, and can believe that at best 'the author allowed himself here and there, and perhaps half accidentally, to follow the alphabetic order.'

HABAKKUK

The theme of Habakkuk is the horrors of the Chaldean invasion, the overweening arrogance of the conqueror, his inability to see that he is but the rod of God's anger, and his impious boasting of his own power. Yet, beyond the thundercloud, the prophet has vision granted to him to see the day when these Chaldeans, their work done, shall fall before a mightier foe. Two feelings fill the prophet's heart. He knows that on Israel God's wrath is to be manifested at the hands of pitiless invaders, while beyond the storm of trouble God's purpose of mercy fully holds till, in the Psalm, with which the prophecy ends, where the two thoughts are blended, all is forgotten but God's love for His people.

Ideas of suffering and of deliverance run through the first two chapters, which seem filled with a kind of repressed force till we reach the utterance, at once expectant and jubilant, of the conclusion. The whole book forms a perfect artistic whole, which may well have been given forth to Israel at one time.

What, then, was that time? Of external evidence we may be said to know nothing, save in so far as we may argue from the position which Habakkuk occupies among 'the Twelve,' between Nahum and Zephaniah. Yet two remarks in i. 5 seem to point to a sufficiently plain conclusion. The prophet tells his hearers the doom shall fall 'in your days,' and he knows with what incredulity his words will be received.

When the Chaldean army under Nebuchadnezzar broke the Egyptian army to pieces at Carchemish (605 B.C.), such incredulity would have been inconceivable. We take this then as our posterior limit. The distance we may go back is tied by the words 'in your days.' From the death of Manasseh (642 B.C.) to the first Chaldean invasion in the reign of Jehoiakim would be less than forty years, so that if the prophecy were delivered in the closing years of Manasseh's reign, many of those who heard it would be alive when the terrible fulfilment came. This condition would fail to be satisfied if we fixed the prophecy at an earlier date; and indeed a period of fierce persecution is not that which is pictured for us by Habakkuk, but an age of careless indifference, in which the law is slack and dead. The early years of Josiah again would suit the conditions, but this becomes out of the question when once that single-hearted and strong-willed reformer set himself to restore the worship of Jehovah. There are those who have referred the prophecy to the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. But this would be to make the reference to the incredulity unmeaning. All keen observers must have felt certain, when the young Chaldean Titan was victor over Egypt, that he would move westward and Israel would lie in his direct track. Else we have the inconceivable alternative that the prophet antedates his utterance. It is incredible that after such a fraud the writer would close his message with the solemn words, 'The Lord is in His holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before Him ;' and that even if we are merely dealing with an uninspired religious poet. How infinitely more incredible, if we have an utterance beyond that of poet, a messenger setting forth the message of the Holy Ghost. We have little doubt therefore that the most reasonable view is that which refers the prophecy to the closing years of Manasseh or the opening years of Josiah.

The foregoing remarks rest upon the assumption of the integrity of the prophecy as a whole. A recent theory, which calls for a brief remark here, runs counter to this. Instead of taking i. 2-4 as a picture of civil discord in Israel and the Chaldeans as the means appointed for the chastening of Israel, we are to take those verses as setting forth the doings of an earlier oppressor, and are to view the Chaldeans as raised for the overthrow of this oppressor. As the result of this theory, the description of the Chaldeans, i. 5-11, is taken from its place and made to follow ii. 4; that is, after the vision to the prophet on his watch-tower, so that chap. i. now runs vv. 1-4, 12-17.

We can only indicate most briefly our reasons for not accepting this theory-(a) Who is the oppressor on this view set forth

« VorigeDoorgaan »