the prediction of future events; it is especially understood
of those predictions which are contained in the Holy Scriptures; all of
which claim divine inspiration, and by their wonderful fulfilment are
proved to have proceeded from God, who only with certainty can know the
future. Prophecy is one great branch of the external evidence of the
truth of the Scriptures; and the nature and force of this kind of
evidence may here be properly pointed out. No argument _à priori_
against the possibility of prophecy can be attempted by any one who
believes in the existence and infinitely perfect nature of God. The
infidel author of “The Moral Philosopher,” indeed, rather insinuates
than attempts fully to establish a dilemma with which to perplex those
who regard prophecy as one of the proofs of a divine revelation. He
thinks that either prophecy must respect events necessary, as depending
upon necessary causes, which might be certainly foreknown and predicted;
or that, if human actions are free, and effects contingent, the
possibility of prophecy must be given up, as it implies foreknowledge,
which, if granted, would render them necessary. The first part of this
objection might be allowed, were there no predictions to be adduced in
favour of a professed revelation, except such as related to events which
human experience has taught to be dependent upon some cause, the
existence and necessary operation of which are within the compass of
human knowledge. But to foretel such events would not be to prophesy,
any more than to say that it will be light to-morrow at noon, or that on
a certain day and hour next year there will occur an eclipse of the sun
or moon, when that event has been previously ascertained by astronomical
calculation. If, however, it were allowed that all events depended upon
a chain of necessary causes, yet, in a variety of instances, the
argument from prophecy would not be at all affected; for the foretelling
of necessary results in certain circumstances is beyond human
intelligence, because they can only be known to him by whose power those
necessary causes on which they depend have been arranged, and who has
prescribed the times of their operation. To borrow a case, for the sake
of illustration, from the Scriptures, though the claims of their
predictions are not now in question; let us allow that such a prophecy
as that of Isaiah respecting the taking of Babylon by Cyrus was uttered,
as it purports to be, more than a century before Cyrus was born, and
that all the actions of Cyrus and his army, and those of the Babylonian;
monarch and his people, were necessitated is it to be maintained that
the chain of necessitating causes running through more than a century
could be traced by a human mind, so as to describe the precise manner in
which that fatality would unfold itself, even to the turning of the
river, the drunken carousal of the inhabitants, and the neglect of
shutting the gates of the city? This being by uniform and universal
experience known to be above all human apprehension, would therefore
prove that the prediction was made in consequence of a communication
from a superior and divine Intelligence. Were events, therefore,
subjected to invincible fate and necessity, there might nevertheless be
prophecy.
The other branch of the dilemma is founded on the notion that if we
allow the moral freedom of human actions, prophecy is impossible,
because certain foreknowledge is contrary to that freedom, and fixes and
renders the event necessary. To this the reply is, that the objection is
founded on a false assumption, the divine foreknowledge having no more
influence in effectuating or making certain any event than human
foreknowledge in the degree in which it may exist, there being no moral
causality at all in knowledge. This lies in the will, which is the
determining acting principle in every agent; or, as Dr. Samuel Clarke
has expressed it, in answer to another kind of objector, “God’s
infallible judgment concerning contingent truths does no more alter the
nature of the things, and cause them to be necessary, than our judging
right at any time concerning a contingent truth makes it cease to be
contingent; or than our science of a present truth is any cause of its
being either true or present. Here, therefore, lies the fallacy of our
author’s argument. Because, from God’s foreknowing the existence of
things depending upon a chain of necessary causes, it follows that the
existence of the things must needs be necessary; therefore, from God’s
judging infallibly concerning things which depend not on necessary but
free causes, he concludes that these things also depend not upon free
but necessary causes. Contrary, I say, to the supposition in the
argument; for it must not be first supposed that things are in their own
nature necessary; but from the power of judging infallibly concerning
free events, it must be proved that things, otherwise supposed free,
will thereby unavoidably become necessary.” The whole question lies in
this, Is the simple knowledge of an action a necessitating cause of the
action? And the answer must be in the negative, as every man’s
consciousness will assure him. If the causality of influence, either
immediate, or by the arrangement of compelling events, be mixed up with
this, the ground is shifted; and it is no longer a question which
respects simple prescience. (See _Prescience_.) This metaphysical
objection having no foundation in truth, the force of the evidence
arising from predictions of events, distant, and beyond the power of
human sagacity to anticipate, and uttered as authentications of a divine
commission, is apparent. “Such predictions, whether in the form of
declaration, description, or representation of things future,” as Mr.
Boyle justly observes, “are supernatural things, and may properly be
ranked among miracles.” For when, for instance, the events are distant
many years or ages from the uttering of the prediction itself, depending
on causes not so much as existing when the prophecy was spoken and
recorded, and likewise upon various circumstances and a long arbitrary
series of things, and the fluctuating uncertainties of human volitions,
and especially when they depend not at all upon any external
circumstances nor upon any created being, but arise merely from the
counsels and appointment of God himself,--such events can be foreknown
only by that Being, one of whose attributes is omniscience, and can be
foretold by him only to whom the “Father of lights” shall reveal them;
so that whoever is manifestly endued with that predictive power must, in
that instance, speak and act by divine inspiration, and what he
pronounces of that kind must be received as the word of God; nothing
more being necessary to assure us of this than credible testimony that
such predictions were uttered before the event, or conclusive evidence
that the records which contain them are of the antiquity to which they
pretend.
The distinction between the prophecies of Scripture and the oracles of
Heathenism is marked and essential. In the Heathen oracles we cannot
discern any clear and unequivocal tokens of genuine prophecy. They were
destitute of dignity and importance, had no connection with each other,
tended to no object of general concern, and never looked into times
remote from their own. We read only of some few predictions and
prognostications, scattered among the writings of poets and
philosophers, most of which, beside being very weakly authenticated,
appear to have been answers to questions of merely local, personal, and
temporary concern, relating to the issue of affairs then actually in
hand, and to events speedily to be determined. Far from attempting to
form any chain of prophecies, respecting things far distant as to time
or place, or matters contrary to human probability, and requiring
supernatural agency to effect them, the Heathen priests and soothsayers
did not even pretend to a systematic and connected plan. They hardly
dared, indeed, to assume the prophetic character in its full force, but
stood trembling, as it were, on the brink of futurity, conscious of
their inability to venture beyond the depths of human conjecture. Hence
their predictions became so fleeting, so futile, so uninteresting, that,
though they were collected together as worthy of preservation, they soon
fell into disrepute and almost total oblivion. (See _Oracles_.) The
Scripture prophecies, on the other hand, constitute a series of divine
predictions, relating principally to one grand object, of universal
importance, the work of man’s redemption, and carried on in regular
progression through the patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian
dispensations, with a harmony and uniformity of design, clearly
indicating one and the same divine Author. They speak of the agents to
be employed in it, and especially of the great agent, the Redeemer
himself; and of those mighty and awful proceedings of Providence as to
the nations of the earth, by which judgment and mercy are exercised with
reference both to the ordinary principles of moral government, and
especially to this restoring economy, to its struggles, its oppositions,
and its triumphs. They all meet in Christ, as in their proper centre,
and in him only; however many of the single lines, when considered
apart, may be imagined to have another direction, and though they may
pass through intermediate events. If we look, says Bishop Hurd, into the
prophetic writings, we find that prophecy is of a prodigious extent;
that it commenced from the fall of man, and reaches to the consummation
of all things; that for many ages it was delivered darkly to a few
persons, and with large intervals from the date of one prophecy to that
of another; but, at length, became more clear, more frequent, and was
uniformly carried on in the line of one people, separated from the rest
of the world,--among other reasons assigned, for this principally, to be
the repository of the divine oracles; that, with some intermission, the
spirit of prophecy subsisted among that people to the coming of Christ;
that he himself and his Apostles exercised this power in the most
conspicuous manner, and left behind them many predictions, recorded in
the books of the New Testament, which profess to respect very distant
events, and even run out to the end of time, or, in St. John’s
expression, to that period “when the mystery of God shall be perfected.”
Farther, beside the extent of this prophetic scheme, the dignity of the
Person whom it concerns deserves our consideration. He is described in
terms which excite the most august and magnificent ideas. He is spoken
of, indeed, sometimes as being “the seed of the woman,” and as “the Son
of man;” yet so as being at the same time of more than mortal
extraction. He is even represented to us as being superior to men and
angels; as far above all principality and power; above all that is
accounted great, whether in heaven or in earth; as the word and wisdom
of God; as the eternal Son of the Father; as the Heir of all things, by
whom he made the worlds; as the brightness of his glory, and the express
image of his person. We have no words to denote greater ideas than
these; the mind of man cannot elevate itself to nobler conceptions. Of
such transcendent worth and excellence is that Jesus said to be, to whom
all the prophets bear witness! Lastly, the declared purpose for which
the Messiah, prefigured by so long a train of prophecy, came into the
world, corresponds to all the rest of the representation. It was not to
deliver an oppressed nation from civil tyranny, or to erect a great
civil empire, that is, to achieve one of those acts which history
accounts most heroic. No: it was not a mighty state, a victor people,
_Non res Romanæ perituraque regna_,
[Not the empire of Rome and kingdoms about to perish,]
that was worthy to enter into the contemplation of this divine Person.
It was another and far sublimer purpose, which he came to accomplish; a
purpose, in comparison of which all our policies are poor and little,
and all the performances of man as nothing. It was to deliver a world
from ruin; to abolish sin and death; to purify and immortalize human
nature; and thus, in the most exalted sense of the words, to be the
Saviour of men and the blessing of all nations. There is no exaggeration
in this account: a spirit of prophecy pervading all time, characterizing
one Person of the highest dignity, and proclaiming the accomplishment of
one purpose, the most beneficent, the most divine, the imagination
itself can project. Such is the Scriptural delineation of that economy
which we call prophetic.
The advantage of this species of evidence belongs then exclusively to
our revelation. Heathenism never made any clear and well founded
pretensions to it. Mohammedanism, though it stands itself as a proof of
the truth of Scripture prophecy, is unsupported by a single prediction
of its own.
The objection which has been raised to Scripture prophecy, from its
supposed obscurity, has no solid foundation. There is, it is true, a
prophetic language of symbol and emblem; but it is a language which is
definite and not equivocal in its meaning, and as easily mastered as the
language of poetry, by attentive persons. This, however, is not always
used. The style of the prophecies of Scripture very often differs in
nothing from the ordinary style of the Hebrew poets; and, in not a few
cases, and those too on which the Christian builds most in the argument,
it sinks into the plainness of historical narrative. Some degree of
obscurity is essential to prophecy: for the end of it was not to gratify
human curiosity, by a detail of future events and circumstances; and too
great clearness and speciality might have led to many artful attempts to
fulfil the predictions, and so far the evidence of their accomplishment
would have been weakened. The two great ends of prophecy are, to excite
expectation before the event, and then to confirm the truth by a
striking and unequivocal fulfilment; and it is a sufficient answer to
the allegation of the obscurity of the prophecies of Scripture, that
they have abundantly accomplished those objects, among the most
intelligent and investigating, as well as among the simple and
unlearned, in all ages. It cannot be denied, for instance, leaving out
particular cases which might be given, that by means of these
predictions the expectation of the incarnation and appearance of a
divine Restorer was kept up among the people to whom they were given,
and spread even to the neighbouring nations; that as these prophecies
multiplied, the hope became more intense; and that at the time of our
Lord’s coming, the expectation of the birth of a very extraordinary
person prevailed, not only among the Jews, but among other nations. This
purpose was then sufficiently answered, and an answer is given to the
objection. In like manner prophecy serves as the basis of our hope in
things yet to come; in the final triumph of truth and righteousness on
earth, the universal establishment of the kingdom of our Lord, and the
rewards of eternal life to be bestowed at his second appearing. In these
all true Christians agree; and their hope could not have been so
uniformly supported in all ages and under all circumstances, had not the
prophecies and predictive promises conveyed with sufficient clearness
the general knowledge of the good for which they looked, though many of
its particulars be unrevealed. The second end of prophecy is, to confirm
the truth by the subsequent event. Here the question of the actual
fulfilment of Scripture prophecy is involved; and it is no argument
against the unequivocal fulfilment of several prophecies, that many have
doubted or denied what the believers in revelation have on this subject
so strenuously contended for. How few of mankind have read the
Scriptures with serious attention, or been at the pains to compare their
prophecies with the statements in history. How few, especially of the
objectors to the Bible, have read it in this manner! How many of them
have confessed unblushingly their unacquaintance with its contents, or
have proved what they have not confessed by the mistakes and
misrepresentations into which they have fallen! As for the Jews, the
evident dominion of their prejudices, their general averseness to
discussion, and the extravagant principles of interpretation they have
adopted for many ages, which set all sober criticism at defiance, render
nugatory any authority which might be ascribed to their denial of the
fulfilment of certain prophecies in the sense adopted by Christians. We
may add to this, that among Christian critics themselves there may be
much disagreement. Eccentricities and absurdities are found among the
learned in every department of knowledge, and much of this waywardness
and affectation of singularity has infected interpreters of Scripture.
But, after all, there is a truth and reason in every subject, which the
understandings of the generality of men will apprehend and acknowledge
whenever it is fully understood and impartially considered; to this in
all such cases the appeal can only be made, and here it may be made with
confidence. Instances of the signal fulfilment of numerous prophecies
are scattered through various articles in this volume; so that it is not
necessary to repeat them here. A few words on the _double sense_ of
prophecy may, however, be added.
For want of a right apprehension of the true meaning of this somewhat
unfortunate term which has obtained in theology, an objection of another
kind has been raised, as though no definite meaning could be assigned to
the prophecies of Scripture. Nothing can be more unfounded. The double
sense of many prophecies in the Old Testament, says an able writer, has
been made a pretext by ill disposed men, for representing them as of
uncertain meaning, and resembling the ambiguity of the Pagan oracles.
But whoever considers the subject with due attention, will perceive how
little ground there is for such an accusation. The equivocations of the
Heathen oracles manifestly arose from their ignorance of future events,
and from their endeavours to conceal that ignorance by such indefinite
expressions, as might be equally applicable to two or more events of a
_contrary_ description. But the double sense of the Scripture
prophecies, far from originating in any doubt or uncertainty, as to the
fulfilment of them in either sense, springs from a foreknowledge of
their accomplishment in _both_; whence the prediction is purposely so
framed as to include both events, which, so far from being contrary to
each other, are typical the one of the other, and are thus connected
together by a mutual dependency or relation. This has often been
satisfactorily proved, with respect to those prophecies which referred,
in their primary sense, to the events of the Old Testament, and, in
their farther and more complex signification, to those of the New: and
on this double accomplishment of some prophecies is grounded our firm
expectation of the completion of others, which remain yet unfulfilled in
their secondary sense, but which we justly consider as equally uncertain
in their issue as those which are already past. So far, then, from any
valid objection lying against the credibility of the Scripture
prophecies, from these seeming ambiguities of meaning, we may urge them
as additional proofs of their coming from God. For, who but the Being
that is infinite in knowledge and in counsel could so construct
predictions as to give them a twofold application, to events distant
from, and, to human foresight, unconnected with, each other? What power
less than divine could so frame them as to make the accomplishment of
them in one instance a solemn pledge and assurance of their completion
in another instance, of still higher and more universal importance?
Where will the scoffer find any thing like this in the artifices of
Heathen oracles, to conceal their ignorance, and to impose on the
credulity of mankind? See ORACLES.
On this subject it may be observed, by way of general illustration, that
the remarkable personages under the old dispensation were sometimes in
the description of their characters, and in the events of their lives,
the representatives of the future dispensers of evangelical blessings,
as Moses and David were unquestionably types of Christ, Ezek. xxxiv, 23;
Matt. xi, 14; Heb. vi, 20; vii, 1–3. Persons likewise were sometimes
descriptive of things, as Sarah and Hagar were allegorical figures of
the two covenants, Gal. iv, 22–31; Rom. ix, 8–13. And, on the other
hand, things were used to symbolize persons, as the brazen serpent and
the paschal lamb were signs of our healing and spotless Redeemer, Exodus
xii, 46; John iii, 14; xix, 36. And so, lastly, ceremonial appointments
and legal circumstances were preördained as significant of Gospel
institutions, 1 Cor. x, 1–11; Heb. viii, 5; ix, x; 1 Pet. iii, 20, 22.
Hence it was that many of the descriptions of the prophets had a twofold
character; bearing often an immediate reference to present
circumstances, and yet being in their nature predictive of future
occurrences. What they reported of the type was often in a more signal
manner applicable to the thing typified, Psalm xxi, 4–6; xl, 1, 7–10;
xii, 4; Lam. xiii, 1–30; John xiii, 18; Dan. xi, 36, 37; what they spoke
literally of present, was figuratively descriptive of future
particulars; and what was applied in a figurative sense to existing
persons, was often actually characteristic of their distant archetypes,
Psalm xxii, 16–18, &c. Many passages then in the Old Testament, which in
their first aspect appear to be historical, are in fact prophetic, and
they are so cited in the New Testament, not by way of ordinary
accommodation, or casual coincidence, but as intentionally predictive,
as having a double sense, a literal and a mystical interpretation, Hosea
xi, 1; Matt. ii, 15.
Beside these historical passages, of which the covert allusions were
explained by the interpretation of the Gospel writers, who were
enlightened by the Spirit to unfold the mysteries of Scripture, the
prophets often uttered positive predictions which, in consequence of the
correspondence established between the two dispensations, were
descriptive of a double event, however they might be themselves ignorant
of the full extent of those prophecies which they delivered. For
instance, their promises of present success and deliverances were often
significant of distant benefits, and secular consolations conveyed
assurances of evangelical blessings, 2 Sam. vii, 13, 14; Heb. i, 5. Thus
their prophecies received completion in a first and secondary view. As
being in part signs to excite confidence, they had an immediate
accomplishment, but were afterward fulfilled in a more illustrious
sense, 1 Kings xiii, 2, 3; Isaiah vii, 14; Matt. i, 22; Dan. ix, 27;
xii, 7; 1 Macc. i, 54; Matt. xxiv, 15; the prophets being inspired, by
the suggestions of the Spirit, to use expressions magnificent enough to
include the substance in the description of the figure. That many of the
prophecies in the Old Testament were direct, and singly and exclusively
applicable to, and accomplished in, our Saviour, is certain, Gen. xlix,
10; Psalm xlii, xlv; Isaiah lii, liii; Daniel vii, 13, 14; Micah v, 2;
Zech. ix, 9; Mal. iii, 1.
It requires much attention to comprehend the full import and extent of
this typical dispensation, and the chief obscurities which prevail in
the sacred writings are to be attributed to the double character of
prophecy. To unravel this is, however, an interesting and instructive
study; though an admiration of the spiritual meaning should never lead
us to disregard or undervalue the first and evident signification; for
many great men have been so dazzled by their discoveries in this mode of
explication, as to be hurried into wild and extravagant excess; as is
evident from the writings of Origen and Jerom; as also from the
Commentaries of Austin, who acknowledges that he had too far indulged in
the fancies of an exuberant imagination, declaring that the other parts
of Scripture are the best commentaries. The Apostles and the evangelists
are, indeed, the best expositors; and where those infallible guides have
led the way, we need not hesitate to follow their steps by the light of
clear reason and just analogy.
It is this double character of prophecy which occasions those unexpected
transitions and sudden interchanges of circumstance so observable in the
prophetic books. Hence different predictions are sometimes blended and
mixed together; temporal and spiritual deliverances are foretold in one
prophecy; and greater and smaller events are combined in one point of
view. Hence, likewise, one chain of connected design runs through the
whole scheme of prophecy, and a continuation of events successively
fulfilling, and successively branching out into new predictions,
continued to confirm the faith, and to keep alive the expectations, of
the Jews. Hence was it the character of the prophetic spirit to be rapid
in its description, and regardless of the order of history; to pass with
quick and unexpected celerity from subject to subject, and from period
to period. “And we must allow,” says Lord Bacon, “for that latitude that
is agreeable and familiar to prophecy, which is of the nature of its
Author, with whom a thousand years are but as one day.” The whole of the
great scheme must have been at once present to the divine Mind; but God
described its parts in detail to mankind, in such measures and in such
proportions, that the connection of every link was obvious, and its
relations apparent in every point of view, till the harmony and entire
consistency of the plan were displayed to those who witnessed its
perfection in the advent of Christ.
of those predictions which are contained in the Holy Scriptures; all of
which claim divine inspiration, and by their wonderful fulfilment are
proved to have proceeded from God, who only with certainty can know the
future. Prophecy is one great branch of the external evidence of the
truth of the Scriptures; and the nature and force of this kind of
evidence may here be properly pointed out. No argument _à priori_
against the possibility of prophecy can be attempted by any one who
believes in the existence and infinitely perfect nature of God. The
infidel author of “The Moral Philosopher,” indeed, rather insinuates
than attempts fully to establish a dilemma with which to perplex those
who regard prophecy as one of the proofs of a divine revelation. He
thinks that either prophecy must respect events necessary, as depending
upon necessary causes, which might be certainly foreknown and predicted;
or that, if human actions are free, and effects contingent, the
possibility of prophecy must be given up, as it implies foreknowledge,
which, if granted, would render them necessary. The first part of this
objection might be allowed, were there no predictions to be adduced in
favour of a professed revelation, except such as related to events which
human experience has taught to be dependent upon some cause, the
existence and necessary operation of which are within the compass of
human knowledge. But to foretel such events would not be to prophesy,
any more than to say that it will be light to-morrow at noon, or that on
a certain day and hour next year there will occur an eclipse of the sun
or moon, when that event has been previously ascertained by astronomical
calculation. If, however, it were allowed that all events depended upon
a chain of necessary causes, yet, in a variety of instances, the
argument from prophecy would not be at all affected; for the foretelling
of necessary results in certain circumstances is beyond human
intelligence, because they can only be known to him by whose power those
necessary causes on which they depend have been arranged, and who has
prescribed the times of their operation. To borrow a case, for the sake
of illustration, from the Scriptures, though the claims of their
predictions are not now in question; let us allow that such a prophecy
as that of Isaiah respecting the taking of Babylon by Cyrus was uttered,
as it purports to be, more than a century before Cyrus was born, and
that all the actions of Cyrus and his army, and those of the Babylonian;
monarch and his people, were necessitated is it to be maintained that
the chain of necessitating causes running through more than a century
could be traced by a human mind, so as to describe the precise manner in
which that fatality would unfold itself, even to the turning of the
river, the drunken carousal of the inhabitants, and the neglect of
shutting the gates of the city? This being by uniform and universal
experience known to be above all human apprehension, would therefore
prove that the prediction was made in consequence of a communication
from a superior and divine Intelligence. Were events, therefore,
subjected to invincible fate and necessity, there might nevertheless be
prophecy.
The other branch of the dilemma is founded on the notion that if we
allow the moral freedom of human actions, prophecy is impossible,
because certain foreknowledge is contrary to that freedom, and fixes and
renders the event necessary. To this the reply is, that the objection is
founded on a false assumption, the divine foreknowledge having no more
influence in effectuating or making certain any event than human
foreknowledge in the degree in which it may exist, there being no moral
causality at all in knowledge. This lies in the will, which is the
determining acting principle in every agent; or, as Dr. Samuel Clarke
has expressed it, in answer to another kind of objector, “God’s
infallible judgment concerning contingent truths does no more alter the
nature of the things, and cause them to be necessary, than our judging
right at any time concerning a contingent truth makes it cease to be
contingent; or than our science of a present truth is any cause of its
being either true or present. Here, therefore, lies the fallacy of our
author’s argument. Because, from God’s foreknowing the existence of
things depending upon a chain of necessary causes, it follows that the
existence of the things must needs be necessary; therefore, from God’s
judging infallibly concerning things which depend not on necessary but
free causes, he concludes that these things also depend not upon free
but necessary causes. Contrary, I say, to the supposition in the
argument; for it must not be first supposed that things are in their own
nature necessary; but from the power of judging infallibly concerning
free events, it must be proved that things, otherwise supposed free,
will thereby unavoidably become necessary.” The whole question lies in
this, Is the simple knowledge of an action a necessitating cause of the
action? And the answer must be in the negative, as every man’s
consciousness will assure him. If the causality of influence, either
immediate, or by the arrangement of compelling events, be mixed up with
this, the ground is shifted; and it is no longer a question which
respects simple prescience. (See _Prescience_.) This metaphysical
objection having no foundation in truth, the force of the evidence
arising from predictions of events, distant, and beyond the power of
human sagacity to anticipate, and uttered as authentications of a divine
commission, is apparent. “Such predictions, whether in the form of
declaration, description, or representation of things future,” as Mr.
Boyle justly observes, “are supernatural things, and may properly be
ranked among miracles.” For when, for instance, the events are distant
many years or ages from the uttering of the prediction itself, depending
on causes not so much as existing when the prophecy was spoken and
recorded, and likewise upon various circumstances and a long arbitrary
series of things, and the fluctuating uncertainties of human volitions,
and especially when they depend not at all upon any external
circumstances nor upon any created being, but arise merely from the
counsels and appointment of God himself,--such events can be foreknown
only by that Being, one of whose attributes is omniscience, and can be
foretold by him only to whom the “Father of lights” shall reveal them;
so that whoever is manifestly endued with that predictive power must, in
that instance, speak and act by divine inspiration, and what he
pronounces of that kind must be received as the word of God; nothing
more being necessary to assure us of this than credible testimony that
such predictions were uttered before the event, or conclusive evidence
that the records which contain them are of the antiquity to which they
pretend.
The distinction between the prophecies of Scripture and the oracles of
Heathenism is marked and essential. In the Heathen oracles we cannot
discern any clear and unequivocal tokens of genuine prophecy. They were
destitute of dignity and importance, had no connection with each other,
tended to no object of general concern, and never looked into times
remote from their own. We read only of some few predictions and
prognostications, scattered among the writings of poets and
philosophers, most of which, beside being very weakly authenticated,
appear to have been answers to questions of merely local, personal, and
temporary concern, relating to the issue of affairs then actually in
hand, and to events speedily to be determined. Far from attempting to
form any chain of prophecies, respecting things far distant as to time
or place, or matters contrary to human probability, and requiring
supernatural agency to effect them, the Heathen priests and soothsayers
did not even pretend to a systematic and connected plan. They hardly
dared, indeed, to assume the prophetic character in its full force, but
stood trembling, as it were, on the brink of futurity, conscious of
their inability to venture beyond the depths of human conjecture. Hence
their predictions became so fleeting, so futile, so uninteresting, that,
though they were collected together as worthy of preservation, they soon
fell into disrepute and almost total oblivion. (See _Oracles_.) The
Scripture prophecies, on the other hand, constitute a series of divine
predictions, relating principally to one grand object, of universal
importance, the work of man’s redemption, and carried on in regular
progression through the patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian
dispensations, with a harmony and uniformity of design, clearly
indicating one and the same divine Author. They speak of the agents to
be employed in it, and especially of the great agent, the Redeemer
himself; and of those mighty and awful proceedings of Providence as to
the nations of the earth, by which judgment and mercy are exercised with
reference both to the ordinary principles of moral government, and
especially to this restoring economy, to its struggles, its oppositions,
and its triumphs. They all meet in Christ, as in their proper centre,
and in him only; however many of the single lines, when considered
apart, may be imagined to have another direction, and though they may
pass through intermediate events. If we look, says Bishop Hurd, into the
prophetic writings, we find that prophecy is of a prodigious extent;
that it commenced from the fall of man, and reaches to the consummation
of all things; that for many ages it was delivered darkly to a few
persons, and with large intervals from the date of one prophecy to that
of another; but, at length, became more clear, more frequent, and was
uniformly carried on in the line of one people, separated from the rest
of the world,--among other reasons assigned, for this principally, to be
the repository of the divine oracles; that, with some intermission, the
spirit of prophecy subsisted among that people to the coming of Christ;
that he himself and his Apostles exercised this power in the most
conspicuous manner, and left behind them many predictions, recorded in
the books of the New Testament, which profess to respect very distant
events, and even run out to the end of time, or, in St. John’s
expression, to that period “when the mystery of God shall be perfected.”
Farther, beside the extent of this prophetic scheme, the dignity of the
Person whom it concerns deserves our consideration. He is described in
terms which excite the most august and magnificent ideas. He is spoken
of, indeed, sometimes as being “the seed of the woman,” and as “the Son
of man;” yet so as being at the same time of more than mortal
extraction. He is even represented to us as being superior to men and
angels; as far above all principality and power; above all that is
accounted great, whether in heaven or in earth; as the word and wisdom
of God; as the eternal Son of the Father; as the Heir of all things, by
whom he made the worlds; as the brightness of his glory, and the express
image of his person. We have no words to denote greater ideas than
these; the mind of man cannot elevate itself to nobler conceptions. Of
such transcendent worth and excellence is that Jesus said to be, to whom
all the prophets bear witness! Lastly, the declared purpose for which
the Messiah, prefigured by so long a train of prophecy, came into the
world, corresponds to all the rest of the representation. It was not to
deliver an oppressed nation from civil tyranny, or to erect a great
civil empire, that is, to achieve one of those acts which history
accounts most heroic. No: it was not a mighty state, a victor people,
_Non res Romanæ perituraque regna_,
[Not the empire of Rome and kingdoms about to perish,]
that was worthy to enter into the contemplation of this divine Person.
It was another and far sublimer purpose, which he came to accomplish; a
purpose, in comparison of which all our policies are poor and little,
and all the performances of man as nothing. It was to deliver a world
from ruin; to abolish sin and death; to purify and immortalize human
nature; and thus, in the most exalted sense of the words, to be the
Saviour of men and the blessing of all nations. There is no exaggeration
in this account: a spirit of prophecy pervading all time, characterizing
one Person of the highest dignity, and proclaiming the accomplishment of
one purpose, the most beneficent, the most divine, the imagination
itself can project. Such is the Scriptural delineation of that economy
which we call prophetic.
The advantage of this species of evidence belongs then exclusively to
our revelation. Heathenism never made any clear and well founded
pretensions to it. Mohammedanism, though it stands itself as a proof of
the truth of Scripture prophecy, is unsupported by a single prediction
of its own.
The objection which has been raised to Scripture prophecy, from its
supposed obscurity, has no solid foundation. There is, it is true, a
prophetic language of symbol and emblem; but it is a language which is
definite and not equivocal in its meaning, and as easily mastered as the
language of poetry, by attentive persons. This, however, is not always
used. The style of the prophecies of Scripture very often differs in
nothing from the ordinary style of the Hebrew poets; and, in not a few
cases, and those too on which the Christian builds most in the argument,
it sinks into the plainness of historical narrative. Some degree of
obscurity is essential to prophecy: for the end of it was not to gratify
human curiosity, by a detail of future events and circumstances; and too
great clearness and speciality might have led to many artful attempts to
fulfil the predictions, and so far the evidence of their accomplishment
would have been weakened. The two great ends of prophecy are, to excite
expectation before the event, and then to confirm the truth by a
striking and unequivocal fulfilment; and it is a sufficient answer to
the allegation of the obscurity of the prophecies of Scripture, that
they have abundantly accomplished those objects, among the most
intelligent and investigating, as well as among the simple and
unlearned, in all ages. It cannot be denied, for instance, leaving out
particular cases which might be given, that by means of these
predictions the expectation of the incarnation and appearance of a
divine Restorer was kept up among the people to whom they were given,
and spread even to the neighbouring nations; that as these prophecies
multiplied, the hope became more intense; and that at the time of our
Lord’s coming, the expectation of the birth of a very extraordinary
person prevailed, not only among the Jews, but among other nations. This
purpose was then sufficiently answered, and an answer is given to the
objection. In like manner prophecy serves as the basis of our hope in
things yet to come; in the final triumph of truth and righteousness on
earth, the universal establishment of the kingdom of our Lord, and the
rewards of eternal life to be bestowed at his second appearing. In these
all true Christians agree; and their hope could not have been so
uniformly supported in all ages and under all circumstances, had not the
prophecies and predictive promises conveyed with sufficient clearness
the general knowledge of the good for which they looked, though many of
its particulars be unrevealed. The second end of prophecy is, to confirm
the truth by the subsequent event. Here the question of the actual
fulfilment of Scripture prophecy is involved; and it is no argument
against the unequivocal fulfilment of several prophecies, that many have
doubted or denied what the believers in revelation have on this subject
so strenuously contended for. How few of mankind have read the
Scriptures with serious attention, or been at the pains to compare their
prophecies with the statements in history. How few, especially of the
objectors to the Bible, have read it in this manner! How many of them
have confessed unblushingly their unacquaintance with its contents, or
have proved what they have not confessed by the mistakes and
misrepresentations into which they have fallen! As for the Jews, the
evident dominion of their prejudices, their general averseness to
discussion, and the extravagant principles of interpretation they have
adopted for many ages, which set all sober criticism at defiance, render
nugatory any authority which might be ascribed to their denial of the
fulfilment of certain prophecies in the sense adopted by Christians. We
may add to this, that among Christian critics themselves there may be
much disagreement. Eccentricities and absurdities are found among the
learned in every department of knowledge, and much of this waywardness
and affectation of singularity has infected interpreters of Scripture.
But, after all, there is a truth and reason in every subject, which the
understandings of the generality of men will apprehend and acknowledge
whenever it is fully understood and impartially considered; to this in
all such cases the appeal can only be made, and here it may be made with
confidence. Instances of the signal fulfilment of numerous prophecies
are scattered through various articles in this volume; so that it is not
necessary to repeat them here. A few words on the _double sense_ of
prophecy may, however, be added.
For want of a right apprehension of the true meaning of this somewhat
unfortunate term which has obtained in theology, an objection of another
kind has been raised, as though no definite meaning could be assigned to
the prophecies of Scripture. Nothing can be more unfounded. The double
sense of many prophecies in the Old Testament, says an able writer, has
been made a pretext by ill disposed men, for representing them as of
uncertain meaning, and resembling the ambiguity of the Pagan oracles.
But whoever considers the subject with due attention, will perceive how
little ground there is for such an accusation. The equivocations of the
Heathen oracles manifestly arose from their ignorance of future events,
and from their endeavours to conceal that ignorance by such indefinite
expressions, as might be equally applicable to two or more events of a
_contrary_ description. But the double sense of the Scripture
prophecies, far from originating in any doubt or uncertainty, as to the
fulfilment of them in either sense, springs from a foreknowledge of
their accomplishment in _both_; whence the prediction is purposely so
framed as to include both events, which, so far from being contrary to
each other, are typical the one of the other, and are thus connected
together by a mutual dependency or relation. This has often been
satisfactorily proved, with respect to those prophecies which referred,
in their primary sense, to the events of the Old Testament, and, in
their farther and more complex signification, to those of the New: and
on this double accomplishment of some prophecies is grounded our firm
expectation of the completion of others, which remain yet unfulfilled in
their secondary sense, but which we justly consider as equally uncertain
in their issue as those which are already past. So far, then, from any
valid objection lying against the credibility of the Scripture
prophecies, from these seeming ambiguities of meaning, we may urge them
as additional proofs of their coming from God. For, who but the Being
that is infinite in knowledge and in counsel could so construct
predictions as to give them a twofold application, to events distant
from, and, to human foresight, unconnected with, each other? What power
less than divine could so frame them as to make the accomplishment of
them in one instance a solemn pledge and assurance of their completion
in another instance, of still higher and more universal importance?
Where will the scoffer find any thing like this in the artifices of
Heathen oracles, to conceal their ignorance, and to impose on the
credulity of mankind? See ORACLES.
On this subject it may be observed, by way of general illustration, that
the remarkable personages under the old dispensation were sometimes in
the description of their characters, and in the events of their lives,
the representatives of the future dispensers of evangelical blessings,
as Moses and David were unquestionably types of Christ, Ezek. xxxiv, 23;
Matt. xi, 14; Heb. vi, 20; vii, 1–3. Persons likewise were sometimes
descriptive of things, as Sarah and Hagar were allegorical figures of
the two covenants, Gal. iv, 22–31; Rom. ix, 8–13. And, on the other
hand, things were used to symbolize persons, as the brazen serpent and
the paschal lamb were signs of our healing and spotless Redeemer, Exodus
xii, 46; John iii, 14; xix, 36. And so, lastly, ceremonial appointments
and legal circumstances were preördained as significant of Gospel
institutions, 1 Cor. x, 1–11; Heb. viii, 5; ix, x; 1 Pet. iii, 20, 22.
Hence it was that many of the descriptions of the prophets had a twofold
character; bearing often an immediate reference to present
circumstances, and yet being in their nature predictive of future
occurrences. What they reported of the type was often in a more signal
manner applicable to the thing typified, Psalm xxi, 4–6; xl, 1, 7–10;
xii, 4; Lam. xiii, 1–30; John xiii, 18; Dan. xi, 36, 37; what they spoke
literally of present, was figuratively descriptive of future
particulars; and what was applied in a figurative sense to existing
persons, was often actually characteristic of their distant archetypes,
Psalm xxii, 16–18, &c. Many passages then in the Old Testament, which in
their first aspect appear to be historical, are in fact prophetic, and
they are so cited in the New Testament, not by way of ordinary
accommodation, or casual coincidence, but as intentionally predictive,
as having a double sense, a literal and a mystical interpretation, Hosea
xi, 1; Matt. ii, 15.
Beside these historical passages, of which the covert allusions were
explained by the interpretation of the Gospel writers, who were
enlightened by the Spirit to unfold the mysteries of Scripture, the
prophets often uttered positive predictions which, in consequence of the
correspondence established between the two dispensations, were
descriptive of a double event, however they might be themselves ignorant
of the full extent of those prophecies which they delivered. For
instance, their promises of present success and deliverances were often
significant of distant benefits, and secular consolations conveyed
assurances of evangelical blessings, 2 Sam. vii, 13, 14; Heb. i, 5. Thus
their prophecies received completion in a first and secondary view. As
being in part signs to excite confidence, they had an immediate
accomplishment, but were afterward fulfilled in a more illustrious
sense, 1 Kings xiii, 2, 3; Isaiah vii, 14; Matt. i, 22; Dan. ix, 27;
xii, 7; 1 Macc. i, 54; Matt. xxiv, 15; the prophets being inspired, by
the suggestions of the Spirit, to use expressions magnificent enough to
include the substance in the description of the figure. That many of the
prophecies in the Old Testament were direct, and singly and exclusively
applicable to, and accomplished in, our Saviour, is certain, Gen. xlix,
10; Psalm xlii, xlv; Isaiah lii, liii; Daniel vii, 13, 14; Micah v, 2;
Zech. ix, 9; Mal. iii, 1.
It requires much attention to comprehend the full import and extent of
this typical dispensation, and the chief obscurities which prevail in
the sacred writings are to be attributed to the double character of
prophecy. To unravel this is, however, an interesting and instructive
study; though an admiration of the spiritual meaning should never lead
us to disregard or undervalue the first and evident signification; for
many great men have been so dazzled by their discoveries in this mode of
explication, as to be hurried into wild and extravagant excess; as is
evident from the writings of Origen and Jerom; as also from the
Commentaries of Austin, who acknowledges that he had too far indulged in
the fancies of an exuberant imagination, declaring that the other parts
of Scripture are the best commentaries. The Apostles and the evangelists
are, indeed, the best expositors; and where those infallible guides have
led the way, we need not hesitate to follow their steps by the light of
clear reason and just analogy.
It is this double character of prophecy which occasions those unexpected
transitions and sudden interchanges of circumstance so observable in the
prophetic books. Hence different predictions are sometimes blended and
mixed together; temporal and spiritual deliverances are foretold in one
prophecy; and greater and smaller events are combined in one point of
view. Hence, likewise, one chain of connected design runs through the
whole scheme of prophecy, and a continuation of events successively
fulfilling, and successively branching out into new predictions,
continued to confirm the faith, and to keep alive the expectations, of
the Jews. Hence was it the character of the prophetic spirit to be rapid
in its description, and regardless of the order of history; to pass with
quick and unexpected celerity from subject to subject, and from period
to period. “And we must allow,” says Lord Bacon, “for that latitude that
is agreeable and familiar to prophecy, which is of the nature of its
Author, with whom a thousand years are but as one day.” The whole of the
great scheme must have been at once present to the divine Mind; but God
described its parts in detail to mankind, in such measures and in such
proportions, that the connection of every link was obvious, and its
relations apparent in every point of view, till the harmony and entire
consistency of the plan were displayed to those who witnessed its
perfection in the advent of Christ.