ISRAEL
as
one
(Gn
20'^).
He
represents
a
higher
conception
of
God
than
J.
J's
anthropomorphism
has
disappeared.
God
is
never
seen
in
human
form
in
E's
narratives,
but
reveals
Himself
in
dreams.
The
ethical
character
of
E's
conception
of
religion
appears,
however,
in
his
conception
of
the
basis
of
the
covenant
which
Moses
made
between
Israel
and
Jahweh.
The
basis
of
this
is
a
Decalogue
in
which
the
ritualistic
is
reduced
to
a
minimum
(Ex
20
without
the
additions
of
Rd),
and
which
contains
the
fundamental
elements
of
morality,
and
a
code
of
laws
(Ex
202^23^^)
embodying
the
principles
of
equity
that
were
necessary
for
the
life
of
a
simple
agricultural
commxmity.
In
giving
expression
to
this
conception,
the
Elohist
placed
himself
in
line
with
the
great
ethical
prophets,
and
did
much
towards
the
differentiation
of
the
religion
of
Israel
from
the
nature
cults
about
it.
In
his
opening
to
the
Decalogue
(Ex
203)
^e
shows
that
his
monotheism
was
somewhat
insecure,
but
his
ethical
conception
of
Jahweh's
relation
to
Israel
helped
to
put
rehgion
on
a
spiritual
basis.
(6)
Hosea's
main
contribution
to
religious
theory
was
the
thought
that
God
is
love
—
not
the
crass
sexual
love
of
the
early
Semite,
but
the
self-sacrificing
love
of
an
affec-tionate
father
or
a
devoted
husband,
who
would
suffer
to
reclaim
the
fallen.
Not
less
stem
than
Amos
in
his
conception
of
ethical
standards,
Hosea
is
less
occupied
with
proclaiming
doom.
He
seeks
by
the
love
of
Jahweh
to
allure
Israel
and
win
her
back.
Amos
devoted
himself
mainl
y
to
checking
the
oppression
of
the
poor,
Hosea
largely
to
the
establishment
of
social
purity.
It
became
clear
to
him
that
this
could
not
be
accomplished
so
long
as
the
primitive
orgies
of
sexual
freedom
which
were
enacted
in
the
name
of
religion
in
ail
the
high
places
were
permitted
to
continue.
These
he
believed
were
no
part
of
the
real
reUgion
of
Jahweh;
they
had
come
into
it
from
the
cult
of
Baal
and
Astarte.
He
accordingly
denounced
this
impunty
as
the
worship
of
another
god,
—
a3_
conjugal
infidelity
to
Jahweh,
and
prohibited
the
application
to
Jahweh
in
the
future
of
the
appellation
Baal,
or
'lord'
(Hos
2'^).
Thus,
as
in
the
time
of
Elijah
the
struggle
for
justice
linked
itself
with
opposition
to
a
foreign
cult,
so
now
the
struggle
for
justice
and
purity
led
to
opposition
to
Baal.
The
cult
was
not
so
foreign
as
the
prophets
supposed.
It
was
native,
as
we
have
seen,
to
Jahweh
as
well
as
to
the
clans
of
Canaan
which
were
now
a
part
of
Israel,
but
the
idea
that
it
was
foreign
helped
the
prophets
to
fight
it.
The
fight
was
taken
up
by
Hosea's
successors
and
pushed
to
success.
The
recovery
of
the
high
place
at
Gezer,
with
ail
its
crass
and
revolting
sym-bolism,
helps
us
to
understand
the
weight
of
deadening
sensualism
against
which
the
prophets
contended.
Hosea.
like
Amos,
was
a
monotheist.
His
conception
of
Jahweh
was,
however,
not
perfect.
He
thought
of
Him
as
caring
especially
for
Israel.
Though
He
ruled
other
nations.
Hosea
believed
He
controlled
them
mainly
for
the
sake
of
Israel.
(7)
Isaiah
continued
the
work
of
Amos
and
Hosea.
He
proclaimed
Jahweh
as
the
All-powerful,
who
fills
heaven
and
earth,
—
the
Holy
One,
who
proves
His
sanctity
by
His
justice.
For
forty
years,
in
many
crises
and
under
varying
figures,
Isaiah
set
forth
this
doctrine.
Man
is
in
Jahweh's
hands
as
clay
in
the
hands
of
the
potter.
The
powerful
Assyrian
is
but
the
rod
by
which
Jahweh
in
His
wrath
is
chastising
Israel;
when
His
will
is
accomplished,
the
rod
will
be
broken
and
thrown
away
(Is
lO^^).
Isaiah's
monotheism,
though
lofty,
had
the
same
defect
as
Hosea's.
In
upholding
this
conception
of
God,
Isaiah
denounced
the
social
sins
which
had
called
out
the
opposition
of
Amos
and
Hosea.
So
great
is
Jahweh's
desire
for
justice,
that
Isaiah
believed
that
He
would
one
day
raise
up
a
prince
great
in
all
the
qualities
of
'a
princely
conqueror,
who
should
be
a
'Wonderful-counsellor,
a
god
of
a
warrior,
a
father
of
booty,
but
a
prince
of
peace'
(Is
9^).
At
another
time
he
saw
a
vision
of
a
kingdom
of
complete
justice
which
an
offshoot
of
the
Davidic
dynasty
should
found
(Is
11).
These
visions
show
how,
in
Isaiah's
conception,
the
Holy
One
would
organize
human
society.
In
addition
to
his
work
in
keeping
alive
these
lofty
ideas,
Isaiah,
as
was
pointed
out
above
(I.
§
19),
gave
practical
direction
to
the
development
of
Israel's
religion.
His
doctrine
of
the
inviolaoility
of
Jerusalem
took
effect
in
later
times,
and
had
much
to
do
with
the
development
of
Judaism.
He
is
probably
responsible
also
for
that
attempt
to
suppress
the
high
places
which
afterwards
found
legal
expression
in
Deuteronomy
._
The
significance
of
this
will,
however,
be
pointed
out
in
considering
that
law.
In
Micah,
a
younger
contemporary
of
Isaiah,
the
spirit
and
message
of
Amos
reappear.
ISRAEL
(8)
The
Deuteronomist.
in
the
development
of
the
Prophetic
period,
follows
Isaiah.
Amos,
Hosea,
and
Isaiah
had
proclaimed
an
ethical
monotheism.
They
had
denounced
ritual
as
without
place
in
the
religion
of
Jahweh.
The
message
had
been
enforced
by
the
awful
calamity
which
had
overtaken
the
Northern
Kingdom;
it
had,
in
consectuence
of
Isaiah's
friendship
with
Hezekiah,
moulded
policies
of
State.
Under
Manasseh,
however,
it
became
painfully
evident
that
it
was
to
take
more
than
moral
means
to
eliminate
impure
ritual
from
the
religion
of
Jahweh.
No
part
of
the
world,
not
even
the
Hebrews,
was
ready
for
a
religion
without
ritual.
Isaiah,
probably,
had
seen
this
in
his
old
age.
The
Deuttronoraist
at
all
events
saw
it.
Ritual
should
be
retained,
but
it
should
be
brought
within
manageable
limits.
The
high
places
should
be
eliminated,
the
cult
centralized
in
Jerusalem
—
the
place
which
Isaiah's
teaching
and
the
signal
defeat
of
Sennacherib
had
so
clearly
proved
to
be
Jahweh's
special
dwelling-place.
From
this
all
sodomites
and
sacred
harlots
were
to
be
excluded,
as
well
as
all
symbols,
such
as
the
'pillar'
and
asherah,
which
were
specially
signifi-cant
of
the
odious
social
practices.
To
accomplish
this,
the
code
of
the
Elohist
was
rewritten
in
such
a
way
that
this
conception
of
the
sanctuary
stood
in
the
forefront,
and
other
parts
were
made
to
conform
to
it.
Into
the
whole
code
a
more
humanitarian
tone
towards
the
poor
was
introduced.
It
was
thus
made
to
express
in
legal
form
the
burden
of
the
best
social
teaching.
Although
the
Deuteronomist
did
not
advance
the
great
ideas
of
spiritual
religion
to
higher
levels,
he
did
by
the
com-promise
of
tms
code
help
those
ideas
to
influence
practical
life.
(9)
Jeremiah,
perhaps
the
greatest
of
the
prophets,
made
great
advances
in
the
conception
of
spiritual
religion.
There
was
in
all
his
work
an
undertone
of
passionate
love,
—
a
heart-throb,
—
like
that
of
Hosea.
The
greatest
significance
of
his
teaching
is
not,
however,
his
tender-ness.
He
saw
that
Jahweh
is
independent
of
temple
or
place.
An
inviolable
Jerusalem
He
did
not
need.
What
Jahweh
desires
is
that
man
shall
break
up
the
fallow
ground
of
his
disposition,
that
he
shall
circumcise
his
heart
(Jer
4^-).
ReU^on
is
a
matter
not
of
a
temple,
but
of
a
soul.
Jeremiah,
too,
was
the
first
to
declare
that
the
idols
of
the
heathen
are
mere
vanities.
Others
had
ignored
them,
he
exhibits
them
in
their
true
nothing-ness
(108
1422).
Another
great
truth
which
Jeremiah
was
the
first
to
grasp
was
that
the
heathen
as
well
as
the
Hebrew
might
come
to
Jahweh
and
be
welcome
(16^*^).
Not
only
did
Jeremiah
proclaim
universality
and
ideality
in
religion,
but
he
shook
himself
free
from
the
old
Semitic
conception
of
solidarity
which
had
prevailed
before
him.
No
lofty
morality
could
prevail
until
every
one
was
re-sponsible
for
his
own
acts
and
for
those
only;
and
this
is
the
standard
proclaimed
by
Jeremiah
(3P^-
2°).
No
prophet
reached
a
loftier
flight.
(
10)
Ezekiel
occupies
a
peculiar
position
in
the
Prophetic
development.
He
stands,
on
one
side
in
the
succession
of
prophets,
and,
on
the
other,
is
the
father
of
Judaism.
As
one
of
the
prophetic
succession,
his
thief
work
lay
in
the
recognition
and
elaboration
of
the
idea
of
in-dividualism.
No
prophet
is
so
impressed
as
he
with
the
fact
that
God
deals
with
each
soul
individually
(Ezk
18).
This
thought
leads
Ezekiel
to
place
a
very
great
value
upon
the
individual.
The
salvation
of
the
individual
be-comes
his
special
care.
He
even
thinks
of
the
Messiah
as
primarily
a
shepherd,
—
a
pastor,
—
one
whose
chief
care
will
be
to
accomplish
the
salvation
of
individuals.
He
addresses
the
rulers
of
Israel
as
shepherds.
Cornill,
who
calls
attention
to
this
phase
of
his
work
(Prophets
of
Israel,
115
£f.).
calls
him
the
father
of
pastoral
theology.
Ezekiel
was,
however,
more
truly
the
successor
of
the
Deuteronomist
than
of
Jeremiah.
Like
the
former,
he
endeavoured
to
adapt
prophetic
conceptions
to
Israelitish
institutions.
Isaiah's
conception
of
Jerusalem
as
the
home
of
Jahweh
he
fully
shared,
and
in
the
closing
chapters
of
his
book
he
utters
his
ideal
for
the
rehabilitation
of
Hebrew
institutions
about
Jerusalem
as
a
centre.
Some
of
these
conceptions
were
unpractical,
but
others
took
deep
root,
and
made
Ezekiel
the
father
of
Judaism..
(11)
The
Second
Isaiah
was
the
last
of
Israel's
really
great
prophets.
His
conception
of
Jahweh
as
the
creator
of
the
universe,
as
the
ruler
of
the
world
and
the
maker
of
history,
is
clearer
than
that
of
any
of
his
predecessors.
The
great
Cyrus,
who
was
conquering
so
successfully
as
the
Second
Isaiah
wrote
was
only
Jahweh's
creature.
Cyrus
might
think
otherwise,
but
Jahweh
and
His
prophet
knew
the
truth.
Even
Hosea
never
expressed
the
tender-ness
of
Jahweh
towards
His
people
with
greater
beauty
than
