The term "prophet" is most properly applied to one who is divinely
instructed as to future events, and divinely inspired to make them known.
In an accommodated sense it is given to the apostles and public teachers
of the primitive Church. And now it is conventionally used to denote a
somewhat less honourable class. "The prophets of our day" are many.
From the positive style they have adopted, you would suppose that the
gift of prescience had come upon them in a far more absolute form than
upon the prophets of old. With more dogmatism and less authority do they
pronounce upon "the times and seasons." Though failure on failure
happens, this seems rather to nerve their confidence; and every
successive mistake is followed by another guess with increased assurance.
1. _Who are the prophets referred to in the text_? They are the men to
whom the term is strictly applicable. We do not forget such names as
Moses and Samuel, and Elijah and Elisha, and others; but their prophecies
are not given with the formality of those distinct books to which perhaps
St. Peter refers. In point of time Jonah comes just with his message of
woe to the city of Nineveh. Amos the herdman and Hosea his contemporary
follow. Then Joel with his thunder, and Isaiah with his evangelism;
Micah with his earnestness; Nahum with his sublimity; and Zephaniah with
his severity, take their place in about equal succession. Jeremiah then
appears with all his weightiness of matter and solemnity of manner.
Habakkuk in briefer form takes up the same subjects. Daniel with great
grandeur of style dwells on the topics of the text. Obadiah stands
between him and Ezekiel as though to make them both more prominent. At a
later period come Haggai and Zechariah; and then Malachi closes the
illustrious train, taking the last pen from the wing of inspiration, or
putting the signet upon the scroll of prophecy. Some of these may be
especially referred to; but we include them all: for "to Him give all the
prophets witness; that in his name whosoever believeth in Him shall have
forgiveness of sins."
(i.) They were _men_; not angels, or belonging to some order of being
superior to ourselves; but they were members with us of the same human
family, and "subject to like passions as we are." They were _sinners_:
born with the old taint of corruption; subject to hereditary guilt,
depravity, and death, and exposed to all the evils to which flesh is
heir. They were _redeemed sinners_, included in that same covenant of
mercy of which we make our boast. They were therefore _personally
interested_ in those truths which became the subject of their search.
The original promise belonged to them as well as to us. They claimed an
interest in the leading facts of patriarchal history, and in the gorgeous
ceremonial of the Mosaic Institute. All the events of divine providence
which were preparing the way for the Messiah's coming, and the
predictions which they themselves uttered, had some personal bearing.
They were not uninterested students of past history, of present
circumstances, or of future events. Their own destinies were involved in
the truths they taught.
(ii.) They were _good men_. That the Divine Being has sometimes made
"false prophets" means of carrying out his purposes there can be no
doubt. But he is a daring man who would venture from this either to
justify or extenuate an impure ministry. Sanctuary services are too pure
and solemn to be performed by any but "_clean hands_." The instruments
which God ordains are holy. With a miserable exception here and there,
even the enemies of truth have not denied to the ancient prophets the
crown of a good character. Try them by any recognised standard of
virtue, and they will not be found wanting. Trace the minutest
circumstances of their private life; their self denial; their exposure to
danger; their fearlessness in denouncing sin; their being proof against
corruption; their zeal; their sympathy; their benevolence--and they
present a startling contrast with the priests of Paganism, or the false
prophets among the Jews.
Call to mind the meekness of Moses; the heroism of Elijah; the gratitude
of David; the sweetness of Hosea; the fervour of Isaiah; the tenderness
of Jeremiah; the constancy of Daniel; the faithfulness of Ezekiel--and
you unhesitatingly endorse the inspired oracle, that they were "holy
men." And although some of the prophets are remarkable for particular
features of character, they are not wanting in all the others which are
requisite to constitute _goodness_.
But what a magnificent portrait could you present to the mind as you
review the whole! The characteristics of these different men meet and
blend in the photograph; and you look upon a being--human it is true, but
sanctified by grace, and fitted to exercise "a more telling influence
upon the destines of the world," than the mightiest statesman, or the
profoundest philosopher, or the noblest warrior of which history can
boast. Like the hues of the rainbow, which in all their softness and
sweetness and sublimity, rejoice to span the heavens together, and make
up one token of the covenant, do the prophets stand before us as one
class of men, unfolding the covenant of mercy, and offering light and
life to a dying and dark world.
(iii.) They were _inspired good men_. And here is suggested one of the
most formidable dangers of the present day. An attempt is being made to
dry up the most fruitful source of confidence which the Christian has in
the truth of his Bible:--viz., its plenary inspiration. We know that
this is not new; but the lover of "the Book" had charmed himself with the
hope that the controversy was over, and the truth triumphant. He is now,
however, alarmed on finding that in addition to the old adversaries--the
infidel, the sceptic, and the profane--he has to enter the lists with new
combatants altogether; and among the rest, the descendants of those
glorious Reformers, who, centuries ago, shook the papal power to its
centre; melted the Bible's chain in the martyr's flame; and liberated the
mind of a continent from the most crushing spiritual despotism the world
ever knew. It is a distressing sound to hear those academic halls, which
have been the greatness and the pride of Germany, resounding with
pernicious error, not to say, positive blasphemy. Looking at the subject
in the light of heaven we gratefully and confidently say that "the word
of the Lord endureth for ever;" but humanly speaking, the Bible is in
danger. And we must be prepared to meet it with a zeal, "such as in the
martyr's glowed, dying champions for their God." The plenary inspiration
of the Scriptures, and therefore of the prophets--is our impregnable
stronghold, and must never be abandoned. The apostle says, when
referring to the Old Testament--"All Scripture is given by inspiration of
God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness. For the prophecy came not in old time by
the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost." And by this inspiration we do not merely mean that some general
ideas were poured into their minds, which they clothed in their own
language, and then published them to the world as a revelation from
heaven. If the Bible be inspired _at all_, it is _fully_ inspired.
Otherwise, you cannot tell where to make the distinction between what is
divine and what is human. You must either maintain the truth of the
_whole_ book, or abandon your conviction of its supreme authority. We
adopt the statement that the prophets "composed their works under so
plenary and immediate an influence of the Holy Spirit that God may be
said to speak by them to man, and not merely that they spoke to men in
the name of God, and by his authority." Mark the wide distinction which
is here suggested. Take the case of an earnest and trustworthy minister.
He tells his congregation that he is anxious to give them the truth; and
has been to God in his closet asking for light. In answer to prayer he
believes that the Holy Spirit has given him light; and, confident that it
is the truth, he announces it to the people. But you would not say that
that man is inspired. There may be much of what is fallible and human
with what is truthful and divine. Suppose, however, that on some Sabbath
morning, he could with authority stand up and say that what is now about
to be declared is not his, but God's--that he is in ignorance of what the
utterance will really be, and that in simple fact, God is to speak
through him, using his lips only as the medium of communication; you have
here an instance of what is meant by plenary inspiration. And this we
say is the case with the prophets. These "holy men of God spake _as_
they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Not in the _words_ which man's wisdom
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth."