ISRAEL
did
this
prophet.
His
conception
of
Jahweh,
too,
is
more
symmetrical
than
that
of
the
8th
century
prophets.
If
in
him,
as
in
them,
Jahweh
seems
to
care
chiefly
for
Israel,
it
is
so
only
in
appearance.
He
haa
shown
m
his
great
poem
on
the
Suffering
Servant
(Is
6213-S3")
that
in
his
view
Israel
was
made
the
chosen
people
not
through
favouritism,
or
to
puff
up
her
self-esteem,
but
because
Jahweh
had
for
her
a
great
mission.
That
mission
was
nothing
less
than
to
bring
the
nations
of
the
world
to
Jahweh.
The
path
of
this
service
was
the
path
of
suffering,
but
it
was
to
accomplish
the
salvation
of
the
world.
Jahweh,
then,
loved
the
world.
He
had
chosen
Israel
and
given
her
her
tragic
experience
that
she
through
this
might
become
a
missionary
to
the
nations
and
bring
them
all
to
Jahweh.
It
does
not
detract
from
the
prophet's
great
conception,
that
the
mission
which
he
conceived
for
his
people
was
never
fulfilled
till
the
coining
of
the
ideal
Israelite,
Jesus
Christ.
This
prophetic
conception
of
God
and
religion,
which
thus
developed
from
Elijah
to
the
Second
Isaiah,
is
unique
in
the
world's
history.
Only
once
has
this
teaching
been
surpassed.
Jesus
of
Nazareth,
who
perfected
this
conception
of
God
and
made
it
capable
of
being
universally
received,
alone
has
gone
beyond
it.
It
was
the
teaching
of
these
prophets
that
re-deemed
the
religion
of
Israel
from
the
level
of
other
Semitic
reUgions.
It
is
this
that
has
made
the
religion
of
Jahweh
the
inspiration
of
the
world
as
the
religion
of
the
one
true
God.
This
prophetic
teaching
is
quite
unaccounted
for
by
its
environment.
Nothing
like
it
has
been
produced
without
its
aid
in
any
portion
of
the
Semitic
world,
or
among
any
other
people.
It
is
in
the
prophetic
teaching
and
the
influences
which
flowed
from
it
that
we
find
proof
of
the
truth
of
the
words:
'Men
spake
from
God,
being
moved
by
the
Holy
Spirit'
(2
P
12').
6.
FromtheExiletotheMaccabees.—
(1)
Itisclearfrom
the
sketch
given
above
(I.
§
24),
that
in
the
rehabilita-tion
of
the
Jewish
communities
in
Palestine
the
whole
sentiment
of
the
organizers
centred
in
the
ritual.
If
there
were
prophets,
such
as
Haggai,
Zechariah,
and
Malachi,
they
uttered
their
prophetic
visions
to
persuade
the
people
to
make
sacrifices
to
restore
and
maintain
the
sacred
ceremonies.
It
thus
happened
that
the
whole
movement
in
the
early
days
after
the
Exile
was
pervaded
more
by
the
priestly
than
by
the
prophetic
spirit.
The
Priestly
document
with
its
supplements
(for
the
analysis
cf
.
Carpenter
and
Harford-Battersby's
HexateucKi
was
the
heart
of
the
whole
movement.
The
religious
Ufe
of
the
Judaean
community
did
not
become
consistent
until
it
was
organized
upon
this
basis,
and
after
this
organization
it
went
forward
confidently.
The
author
of
the
Priestly
document
(P^)
was
the
successor
of
Ezekiel,
as
Ezekiel
had
been
the
successor
of
the
Deuteronomist.
As
Ezekiel
took
more
interest
in
the
organization
of
the
ritual
than
did
D,
so
P^'s
interest
greatly
exceeded
Ezekiel's.
The
prophetic
movement
had
given
P^
his
pure
monotheism.
From
it
he
had
received
a
faith
in
an
All-powerful,
Holy
Creator
and
Ruler
of
the
universe.
The
nearness
and
warmth
of
God,
as
the
prophets
had
conceived
Him,
escaped
P^,
but
with
such
elements
of
the
prophetic
conception
as
he
could
grasp
he
set
himself
to
the
or-ganization
of
the
ritual.
The
ritual
which
had
come
down
to
him
from
his
priestly
ancestry
he
had
received
as
the
will
of
God.
We
can
see
that
it
had
its
birth
in
Semitic
heathenism,
but
he
could
not.
In
reality
this
ritual
bound
him
to
earth
by
the
strands
of
many
a
half-superstitious
custom,
but
in
his
thought
it
had
all
come
from
heaven.
If
this
were
so,
the
problem
to
his
mind
was
to
find
the
connexion
of
all
this
with
the
will
of
the
God
of
the
universe.
To
express
the
vital
connexion
which
he
thought
he
found,
he
re-wrote
the
history
of
the
creation
of
the
world
and
of
the
fortunes
of
the
chosen
people
down
to
the
settlement
in
Canaan,
in
such
a
way
as
to
make
it
appear
that
circumcision
had
been
enjoined
on
Abraham
at
the
very
beginning
of
revela-
ISRAEL
tion
(Gn
17),
and
that
the
basis
of
the
covenant
at
Sinai
was
neither
the
'Book
of
the
Covenant'
(Ex
20"-23"),
nor
the
code
of
Deuteronomy,
but
the
whole
Levitical
ritual.
This
ritual,
as
he
conceived
it,
had
been
pro-foundly
influenced
by
Ezekiel.
The
menial
work
of
the
sanctuary
was
no
longer
to
be
performed,
as
in
pre-exiUc
days,
by
foreign
slaves.
The
descendants
of
those
priests
who
had
ofiiciated
in
shrines
other
than
Jerusalem
were
to
be
assigned
to
these
services
(cf.
Ezk
448-H).
Thus
an
order
of
Levites
as
a
menial
class
was
created.
If
this
ritual
was
the
basis
of
the
covenant
at
Sinai,
it
could
not
have
been
ignored
in
the
Wilderness
Wandering.
There
must
have
been
a
niovable
sanctu-ary.
Solomon's
Temple
was
the
model
shrine
to
Ezekiel
and
the
priests,
but
Solomon's
Temple
must
(so
suppose
P2
and
his
successors)
have
been
patterned
upon
a
previous
nomadic
shrine;
hence
the
account
of
the
Tabernacle
was
placed
in
their
history.
Among
the
newly
created
class
of
Levites
there
were
many
who
had
descended
from
men
who
had
officiated
as
priests
at
Hebron,
Gezer,
Kadesh,
Ashtaroth,
and
many
other
ancient
shrines.
P^
and
his
followers
accounted
for
this
fact
by
supposing
that
Joshua
had
given
the
tribe
of
Levi
cities
in
all
parts
of
the
land
(Jos
21;
cf
.
Barton,
'
Levitical
Cities
of
Israel
in
the
Light
of
the
Excavation
at
Gezer,'
Biblical
World,
xxiv.
167
fl.).
This
conception
was
accepted
as
the
real
account
of
the
history
only
when
the
Priestly
document
had
been
sldlfuUy
combined
with
the
older
writings
in
our
Penta-teuch
in
such
a
way
that
these
priestly
institutions
seemed
to
be
the
heart
of
the
whole
and
to
overshadow
all
else.
Then
apparently
all
.opposition
vanished,
and
priestly
enthusiasm
and
prophetic
fervour
were
joined
by
popular
co-operation
in
establishing
this
ritual
as
the
one
right
method
of
serving
the
Living
God.
This
enthusiasm
was
in
part
the
result
of
a
distorted
reading
of
history,
but
all
uncritical
readers
so
distort
the
history
to
the
present
hour.
By
the
time
of
Nehemiah
this
view
of
the
nistory
was
fully
accepted,
and
by
the
time
of
the
Chronicler,
a
century
later,
it
had
distorted
the
history
of
the
Israelites
in
CanEian,
to
correspond
with
the
priestly
picture,
as
appears
to
this
day
in
the
Books
of
Chronicles.
This
priestly
triumph
was
in
a
way
a
retrogression
from
prophetic
ideals.
Some
of
the
prophets,
as
Jeremiah,
had
taught
a
reUgion
free
and
spiritual,
capable
of
becoming
universal.
The
priestly
conception,
however
noble
its
monotheism,
was
so
harnessed
to
out-worn
ritual
that
it
could
appeal
only
in
a
Umited
degree
to
men
of
other
races.
Nevertheless
this
ritual
had
its
place.
In
the
centuries
which
followed,
when
the
soul
of
the
Hebrew
was
tried
almost
beyond
endurance,
and
no
cheering
voice
of
prophet
was
heard,
it
was
due
to
this
objective
ritual,
as
something
for
which
to
live,
and
strive,
and
fight,
that
he
survived
to
do
his
work
in
the
world.
With
the
adoption
of
the
Priestly
Code
Judaism
was
born.
(2)
The
effects
of
the
priestly
ritual
were
not,
however,
so
deadening
as
one
might
suppose.
Various
causes
prevented
it
from
stifling
the
deeper
religious
hfe.
The
teachings
of
the
prophets
were
cherished,
and
many
of
them
had
taught
that
reUgion
is
a
matter
of
the
heart
and
not
a
ceremonial.
During
the
long
exile
the
devout
Jew
had
learned
how
to
Uve
a
really
reUgious
Ufe
without
the
help
of
Temple
ritual.
Many
of
the
faithful
were
in
Babylonia,
and
were
still
compelled
to
do
without
the
Temple
sacrifices
and
prayers.
Then
the
Law
itself
did
not
contain
sacrifices
for
many
sins.
The
old
customs
adapted
in
Lv
4-6
and
16
provided
sacrifices
for
oidy
very
few
of
the
sins
of
life.
The
sincere
heart
was
compelled
still
to
five
its
Ufe
with
God
in
large
measure
independently
of
the
ritual.
The
Pentateuch
also
contains
many
noble
and
inspiring
precepts
on
moral
and
spiritual
matters.
There
were
those,
too,
who
paid
little
attention
to
theceremoniesof
the
Temple,
although
most
supported
it
as
a
matter
of
duty.
AU
these
causes
combined
to
prevent
the
Law
from
at
once
stereotyping
the
religious
lite.
This
period
became
accordingly
the
creative
period
in
Judaism.
