The Prophets, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel

In prophetic thinking, man is the object of God's vision, concern, and understanding. It is man's vision, concern, and understanding for God that is the goal.
This is the test of the uniqueness of religious experience. Unlike other types of experience, there is no clear and distinct separation of object and comprehension, of reality and response. P. 624

עמוס ב׳:ד׳

(ד) כֹּ֚ה אָמַ֣ר יהוה עַל־שְׁלֹשָׁה֙ פִּשְׁעֵ֣י יְהוּדָ֔ה וְעַל־אַרְבָּעָ֖ה לֹ֣א אֲשִׁיבֶ֑נּוּ עַֽל־מׇאֳסָ֞ם אֶת־תּוֹרַ֣ת יהוה וְחֻקָּיו֙ לֹ֣א שָׁמָ֔רוּ וַיַּתְעוּם֙ כִּזְבֵיהֶ֔ם אֲשֶׁר־הָלְכ֥וּ אֲבוֹתָ֖ם אַחֲרֵיהֶֽם׃

Amos 2:4

(4)Thus said GOD:
For three transgressions of Judah,For four, I will not revoke the decree:Because they have spurned the Teaching of GODAnd have not observed divine laws;They are beguiled by the delusionsAfter which their ancestors walked.

although there was no law in existence governing international relations. Amos, however, presupposes the conception of a law which was not embodied in a contract, the conception of right and wrong which precedes every contract, since all contracts derive their validity from it. Here a conception of law was expressed which was binding for all men, though it was not formally proclaimed; and there was a Lawgiver capable of enforcing it and coercing transgressors. P. 38

For many generations Israel and Judah were not disturbed by any power greater than the small countries in the area. This relatively peaceful situation came to an end in the middle of the ninth century when Assyria emerged as an empire and began to lead many expeditions across the Euphrates, compelling most of the states of Syria as well as the Northern Kingdom of Israel to submit to her sovereignty and to pay tribute. These expeditions, nightmares of extreme ruthlessness, enriched Assyria with plunder of gold, silver, and slaves. The history of the following two centuries is but the story of the expansion of Assyria, and later of Babylonia, and the subjugation of western Asia. P. 48

[Isaiah] received his call to be a prophet in the year in which King Uzziah of Judah died (ca. 742), not long after the death of Jeroboam II of Isracl
(746) and the advent of Tiglath-pileser (745), under whom the Assyrians set themselves the tremendous task of conquering both Babylonia and Syria. Overpowering small states, plundering cities, deporting populations, the Assyrians became a menace that filled Syria and Palestine with terror. Soon Samaria in alliance with Damascus became involved in a treacherous adventure against Judah, which ended in their becoming prey to Assyria's aggression. The relative security of the preceding several centuries was rudely broken. P. 78

Ahaz, overawed by the triumphs of the Assyrian king, readily yielded to the glamour and prestige of the Assyrians in religion as well as in politics. In 732, he went to Damascus to pay homage to Tiglath-pileser. There he saw an altar, which he ordered copied and installed in the Temple at Jerusalem (II Kings 16:10 ff.). He also made changes in the arrangements and furniture of the Temple "because of the king of Assyria" (Il Kings 16:18). The altar made after the Assyrian pattern carried, it seems, the acknowledgment of Assyria's greatness in the realm of religion and was a public recognition of the power of the alien god. P. 82

Ahaz was succeeded by his son Hezckiah (ca. 715-687 в.C.8, whose marvelous career was predicted by Isaiah when the child was still an infant. Hezekiah was the opposite of his father. No king of Judah among his predecessors or his successors could, it was said, be compared to him (Il Kings 18:5). His first act was to repair and to purge the Temple and its vessels, to reorganize the services of the priests and Levites (II Chron. 29:3-36). P. 84

מלכים א י״ח:ה׳

(ה) וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אַחְאָב֙ אֶל־עֹ֣בַדְיָ֔הוּ לֵ֤ךְ בָּאָ֙רֶץ֙ אֶל־כׇּל־מַעְיְנֵ֣י הַמַּ֔יִם וְאֶ֖ל כׇּל־הַנְּחָלִ֑ים אוּלַ֣י ׀ נִמְצָ֣א חָצִ֗יר וּנְחַיֶּה֙ ס֣וּס וָפֶ֔רֶד וְל֥וֹא נַכְרִ֖ית מֵהַבְּהֵמָֽה׃

I Kings 18:5

(5) And Ahab had said to Obadiah, “Go through the land, to all the springs of water and to all the wadis. Perhaps we shall find some grass to keep horses and mules alive, so that we are not left without beasts.”

Politics is based on the power of the sword. But Isaiah was wait ing for the day when nations "shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks." Alliances involve preparation for war, but Isaiah was horrified by the brutalities and carnage which war entails. In his boundless yearning he had a vision of the day when
"nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more" (2:4). War spawns death. But Isaiah was looking to the time when the Lord "will swallow up death for ever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces" (25:8; see p. 234). Israel's security lies in the covenant with God, not in covenants with Egypt or other nations. The mysterious power of faith maintains: God alone is true protection. Such power will not collapse in the hour of disaster: "I will wait for the Lord, Who is hiding His face from the house of Jacob, and I will hope in Him" (8:17). Never must a calamity shake Israel's trust.P. 94

ישעיהו ב׳:ד׳

(ד) וְשָׁפַט֙ בֵּ֣ין הַגּוֹיִ֔ם וְהוֹכִ֖יחַ לְעַמִּ֣ים רַבִּ֑ים וְכִתְּת֨וּ חַרְבוֹתָ֜ם לְאִתִּ֗ים וַחֲנִיתֽוֹתֵיהֶם֙ לְמַזְמֵר֔וֹת לֹא־יִשָּׂ֨א ג֤וֹי אֶל־גּוֹי֙ חֶ֔רֶב וְלֹֽא־יִלְמְד֥וּ ע֖וֹד מִלְחָמָֽה׃ {פ}

Isaiah 2:4

(4)Thus [God] will judge among the nationsAnd arbitrate for the many peoples,And they shall beat their swords into plowsharesAnd their spears into pruning hooks:Nation shall not take upSword against nation;They shall never again know war.

Isaiah's prediction was vindicated by a miraculous event. A disastrous pestilence spread in the Assyrian camp, decimating the amy.
Sennacherib returned to Nineveh and was eventually murdered by his sons (Il Kings 19:36-37).* From 701 for about three-quarters of a century, until the downfall of the Assyrian empire, Judah continued to be a dependency of the Assyrian emperor, and was not involved in the political drama that took place close at hand. Under the reign of Sennacherib's son, Exar-haddon (681-669 B.C.E.), who conquered a great part of Egypt, and under Ashurbanipal (669-633?), Assyria reached the summit of her power. P. 97

מלכים ב י״ט:ל״ו-ל״ז

(לו) וַיִּסַּ֣ע וַיֵּ֔לֶךְ וַיָּ֖שׇׁב סַנְחֵרִ֣יב מֶלֶךְ־אַשּׁ֑וּר וַיֵּ֖שֶׁב בְּנִֽינְוֵֽה׃ (לז) וַיְהִי֩ ה֨וּא מִֽשְׁתַּחֲוֶ֜ה בֵּ֣ית ׀ נִסְרֹ֣ךְ אֱלֹהָ֗יו וְֽאַדְרַמֶּ֨לֶךְ וְשַׂרְאֶ֤צֶר [בָּנָיו֙] הִכֻּ֣הוּ בַחֶ֔רֶב וְהֵ֥מָּה נִמְלְט֖וּ אֶ֣רֶץ אֲרָרָ֑ט וַיִּמְלֹ֛ךְ אֵסַר־חַדֹּ֥ן בְּנ֖וֹ תַּחְתָּֽיו׃ {פ}

II Kings 19:36-37

(36) So King Sennacherib of Assyria broke camp and retreated, and stayed in Nineveh. (37) While he was worshiping in the temple of his god Nisroch, his sons Adrammelech and Sarezer struck him down with the sword. They fled to the land of Ararat, and his son Esarhaddon succeeded him as king.

The call to be a prophet came to Jeremiah in the year 625 B.C.B., and he was active during the reigns of the last kings of Judah-Josiah (640-609 в.с.в.), Jehoiakim (609-598 в.с.в.), Jehoiachin (598-597 B.C.E.), Zedekiah (597-587 B.C.E.) -and continued for some time after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C.E. P.131

Utterances denoting the wrath of God, the intent and threat of destruction, are found more frequently and expressed more strongly in Jeremiah than in any other prophet. For this reason, Jeremiah has often been called a prophet of wrath. However, it would be more significant to say that Jeremiah lived in an age of wrath. His contemporaries had no understanding of the portent of their times, of the way in which God was present at the time. They did not care for time. But a prophet has a responsibility for the moment, an openness to what the moment reveals. He is a person who knows what time it is. To Jeremiah his time was an emergency, one instant away from a cataclysmic event. P. 134

ירמיהו כ״ב:כ״ט

(כט) אֶ֥רֶץ אֶ֖רֶץ אָ֑רֶץ שִׁמְעִ֖י דְּבַר־יהוה׃

Jeremiah 22:29

(29)O land, land, land,Hear the word of GOD!

ירמיהו כ״ב:ל׳

כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יהוה כִּתְב֞וּ אֶת־הָאִ֤ישׁ הַזֶּה֙ עֲרִירִ֔י גֶּ֖בֶר לֹא־יִצְלַ֣ח בְּיָמָ֑יו כִּי֩ לֹ֨א יִצְלַ֜ח מִזַּרְע֗וֹ אִ֚ישׁ יֹשֵׁב֙ עַל־כִּסֵּ֣א דָוִ֔ד וּמֹשֵׁ֥ל ע֖וֹד בִּיהוּדָֽה׃ {פ}

Jeremiah 22:30

Thus said GOD:
Record this man as without succession,One who shall never be found acceptable;For none of his offspring shall be acceptedTo sit on the throne of DavidAnd to rule again in Judah.

During his last years Hezekiah had been completely under the influence of Isaiah. His death in 687/6 brought the rwelve-year-old Manasseh to the beginning of his long reign (687/6-642 B.C.E.), during which the reforms that had been introduced by Hezekiah were abolished. All the high altars and shrines were restored. Manassch remained a docile vassal of Nineveh, and even assisted Assyria's campaign against Egypt, which was conquered by the Assyrian army under Esarhaddon (681-669 в.C.E.) and Ashurbanipal (ca. 669-633
B.C.E. ). King Josiah (640-609 в.C.E.), who ascended the throne following the assassination of his father, Amon (642-640 в.C.E.), made a total break with the policy of Manasseh. The rapid decline of Assyrian power and influence made it easier for those who abhorred Manasseh's idolatry. Young King Josiah inaugurated a reformation which marks an epoch in the religious history of Israel. He undertook, first of all, a consistent purge of foreign cults and practices. Various solar and astral cults, mostly of Mesopotamian origin and imported into Judah in the wake of Assyrian dominion, as well as native cults. P. 165

With Babylonia firmly in his possession, Nabopolassar joined the Median tribes and their king Cyaxares (ca. 625-585 B.C.E.) in the final assault upon Assyria. In the year 612, Nineveh fell before the onslaught. Briefly and almost contemptuously Nabopolassar wrote the epitaph of the overthrown empire: "I slaughtered the land of Subarum, I turned the hostile land into heaps and ruins." "The Assyrian, who since distant days has ruled over the peoples and with his heavy yoke had brought injury to the people of the Land, their feet from Akkad I turned back, their yoke I threw off:"* The Assyrian kingdom disappeared from history, and there was no longer an Assyrian people. The dreaded empire collapsed with surprising speed, only a short time after she had reached the zenith of her power. P. 167

In 605, a change in the balance of power placed Judah in a new danger. The Egyptian Neco, determined to extend his dominion beyond the Euphrates into the northern part of Mesopotamia, put in the field an immense army and reached Carchemish, on the Euphrates, without opposition. Nebuchadnezzar, the son of Nabopolassar, gave battle, and won a crushing victory. Neco was undone and his army fed in confusion, pursued by Nebuchadnezzar; the latter might have overrun Egypt had he not been apprised of his father's sudden death, which compelled him to return to Babylon. A new Babylonian empire came into being, and for many years it was to dominate the Near East. P. 170

At last the king omitted the payment of the tribute, and the issue was joined. Nebuchadnezzar, though occupied elsewhere, had no intention of tolerating such an act. Pending the time when he could act in person, he encouraged marauding nomadic hordes, friendly to the Babylonians, to ravage the land of Judah (Il Kings 24:2; Jer. 35:11). Subsequently, in 597, he arrived in person at the head of an army to besiege Jerusalem. Before the Babylonian army laid siege to the capital, King Jehoiakim died, and his son, the new king Jehoiachin, a lad of eighteen years, realizing the hopelessness of the situation, decided to surrender before an assault should be undertaken. With his mother and the entire court he was carried into captivity, followed by seven thousand men capable of carrying arms and one thousand workers in iron, together with their families, and an enormous booty. A boy of twenty-one named Zedekiah was made king of Judah. P. 172

ירמיהו ל״ג:י׳-י״א

(י) כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יהוה עוֹד֮ יִשָּׁמַ֣ע בַּמָּקוֹם־הַזֶּה֒ אֲשֶׁר֙ אַתֶּ֣ם אֹֽמְרִ֔ים חָרֵ֣ב ה֔וּא מֵאֵ֥ין אָדָ֖ם וּמֵאֵ֣ין בְּהֵמָ֑ה בְּעָרֵ֤י יְהוּדָה֙ וּבְחֻצ֣וֹת יְרוּשָׁלַ֔͏ִם הַֽנְשַׁמּ֗וֹת מֵאֵ֥ין אָדָ֛ם וּמֵאֵ֥ין יוֹשֵׁ֖ב וּמֵאֵ֥ין בְּהֵמָֽה׃ (יא) ק֣וֹל שָׂשׂ֞וֹן וְק֣וֹל שִׂמְחָ֗ה ק֣וֹל חָתָן֮ וְק֣וֹל כַּלָּה֒ ק֣וֹל אֹמְרִ֡ים הוֹדוּ֩ אֶת־יהוה צְבָא֜וֹת כִּי־ט֤וֹב יהוה כִּֽי־לְעוֹלָ֣ם חַסְדּ֔וֹ מְבִאִ֥ים תּוֹדָ֖ה בֵּ֣ית יהוה כִּֽי־אָשִׁ֧יב אֶת־שְׁבוּת־הָאָ֛רֶץ כְּבָרִאשֹׁנָ֖ה אָמַ֥ר יהוה׃ {ס}

Jeremiah 33:10-11

(10) Thus said GOD: Again there shall be heard in this place, which you say is ruined, without humans or animals—in the towns of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem that are desolate, without humans, without inhabitants, without animals— (11) the sound of mirth and gladness, the voice of bridegroom and bride, the voice of those who cry, “Give thanks to GOD of Hosts, for GOD—whose steadfast love is eternal—is good!” as they bring thanksgiving offerings to the House of GOD. For I will restore the fortunes of the land as of old—said GOD.

The eleven years (597-587 B.C.E.) of Zedekiah's reign were notable for a steady decline in Judah's power and for the desperate efforts of Jeremiah to avert the coming disaster. A ruler of good intetions, not entirely unresponsive to warnings of the prophet, whom he consulted on occasion on matters of state (37:3-10, 16-21; 38: 14-28), Zedekiah felt himself helpless among his headstrong officials, and he was under their domination (38:5). P. 172

Meanwhile, the Egyptian relief force was defeated and the singe of Jerusalem resumed. Zedekiah, whose only hope now was for a miracle from God, sent a delegation to Jeremiah, saying "Pray for us. Perhaps the Lord will make the Babylonian king withdraw from us." But the prophet's answer was stern: Your resistance will get weaker.
God Himself will fight against you "with outstretched hand and wrong arm, in anger, in fury, and in great wrath." The city will be captured; some of the people shall die of pestilence, the rest will be carried away in captivity (see 21:44). Jerusalem held out for one and one-half years, until famine decided the issue. In 587 the city fell. The holy city was plundered and burned by the conquerors: the Temple of Solomon went up in lames. P. 175

Yet, it is not political sagacity that explains Jeremiah's opposition to the stand taken by the rulers of the kingdom, implying a reversal of the position taken by Isaiah when he had insisted that Judah should not capitulate to Assyria. The prophet does not see the world from the point of view of a political theory; he is a person who sees the world from the point of view of God; he sees the world through the eyes of God. To Jeremiah, the relationship to Nebuchadnezzar was much less important than the relationship to God. P. 176

The Neo-Babylonian empire did not last long. It declined rapidly after the death of Nebuchadnezzar in the year 562 B.C.E. Cyrus, the Persian king of the little principality of Elam, succeeded in overpower ing the two powers that had divided the Near Eastern world at the fall of Assyria. He defeated the king of the Median empire in 550 and the king of Babylonia in 539. Cyrus was now the head of the great Persian empire, and his power extended as far as the western coast of Asia Minor. P. 184

ישעיהו מ׳:י״ב-י״ד

(יב) מִי־מָדַ֨ד בְּשׇׁעֳל֜וֹ מַ֗יִם וְשָׁמַ֙יִם֙ בַּזֶּ֣רֶת תִּכֵּ֔ן וְכָ֥ל בַּשָּׁלִ֖שׁ עֲפַ֣ר הָאָ֑רֶץ וְשָׁקַ֤ל בַּפֶּ֙לֶס֙ הָרִ֔ים וּגְבָע֖וֹת בְּמֹאזְנָֽיִם׃ (יג) מִֽי־תִכֵּ֥ן אֶת־ר֖וּחַ יהוה וְאִ֖ישׁ עֲצָת֥וֹ יוֹדִיעֶֽנּוּ׃ (יד) אֶת־מִ֤י נוֹעָץ֙ וַיְבִינֵ֔הוּ וַֽיְלַמְּדֵ֖הוּ בְּאֹ֣רַח מִשְׁפָּ֑ט וַיְלַמְּדֵ֣הוּ דַ֔עַת וְדֶ֥רֶךְ תְּבוּנ֖וֹת יוֹדִיעֶֽנּוּ׃

Isaiah 40:12-14

(12)Who measured the waters with a hand’s hollow,And gauged the skies with a span,And meted earth’s dust with a measure,And weighed the mountains with a scaleAnd the hills with a balance?(13)Who has plumbed the mind of GOD? Can anyone disclose God’s plan?(14)Whom did [God] consult, and who bestowed understanding,Providing guidance in the way of right?Who guided [God] in knowledgeAnd made known the path of wisdom?

*According to Rashi, in his Commentary, this passage contains an answer to the problem of why the Lord lets the wicked prosper and Israel suffer.

ישעיהו מ״ה:ט׳-י״א

(ט) ה֗וֹי רָ֚ב אֶת־יֹ֣צְר֔וֹ חֶ֖רֶשׂ אֶת־חַרְשֵׂ֣י אֲדָמָ֑ה הֲיֹאמַ֨ר חֹ֤מֶר לְיֹֽצְרוֹ֙ מַֽה־תַּעֲשֶׂ֔ה וּפׇעׇלְךָ֖ אֵין־יָדַ֥יִם לֽוֹ׃ {ס}(י) ה֛וֹי אֹמֵ֥ר לְאָ֖ב מַה־תּוֹלִ֑יד וּלְאִשָּׁ֖ה מַה־תְּחִילִֽין׃ {ס}(יא) כֹּה־אָמַ֧ר יהוה קְד֥וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל וְיֹצְר֑וֹ הָאֹתִיּ֣וֹת שְׁאָל֔וּנִי עַל־בָּנַ֛י וְעַל־פֹּ֥עַל יָדַ֖י תְּצַוֻּֽנִי׃

Isaiah 45:9-11

(9)Shame on anyone who argues with their Maker,Though naught but a potsherd of earth!Shall the clay say to the potter, “What are you doing?Your work has no handles”?(10)Shame on anyone who asks a father, “What are you begetting?”Or a woman, “What are you bearing?”(11)Thus said GOD, Israel’s Holy One and Maker:Will you question Me on the destiny of My children, Will you instruct Me about the work of My hands?

The Chronicler did not regard the wars of David as wrong. Far from it; God was with David wherever he went, and his victories over the enemies assured security to Israel, so that "violent men shall waste them no more, as formerly," and established his throne forever (1 Chron. 17:8-14). David's wars were regarded as a necessary evil, but the fierce doings David was involved in made him unfit to build the house for the Lord. P. 205

דברי הימים א כ״ח:א׳-ג׳

(א) וַיַּקְהֵ֣ל דָּוִ֣יד אֶת־כׇּל־שָׂרֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֡ל שָׂרֵ֣י הַשְּׁבָטִ֣ים וְשָׂרֵ֣י הַמַּחְלְק֣וֹת הַמְשָׁרְתִ֪ים אֶת־הַמֶּ֟לֶךְ וְשָׂרֵ֣י הָאֲלָפִ֣ים וְשָׂרֵ֣י הַמֵּא֡וֹת וְשָׂרֵ֣י כׇל־רְכוּשׁ־וּמִקְנֶה֩ ׀ לַמֶּ֨לֶךְ וּלְבָנָ֜יו עִם־הַסָּרִיסִ֧ים וְהַגִּבּוֹרִ֛ים וּֽלְכׇל־גִּבּ֥וֹר חָ֖יִל אֶל־יְרוּשָׁלָֽ͏ִם׃ (ב) וַיָּ֨קׇם דָּוִ֤יד הַמֶּ֙לֶךְ֙ עַל־רַגְלָ֔יו וַיֹּ֕אמֶר שְׁמָע֖וּנִי אַחַ֣י וְעַמִּ֑י אֲנִ֣י עִם־לְבָבִ֡י לִבְנוֹת֩ בֵּ֨ית מְנוּחָ֜ה לַאֲר֣וֹן בְּרִית־יהוה וְלַֽהֲדֹם֙ רַגְלֵ֣י אֱלֹהֵ֔ינוּ וַהֲכִינ֖וֹתִי לִבְנֽוֹת׃ (ג) וְהָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אָ֣מַר לִ֔י לֹא־תִבְנֶ֥ה בַ֖יִת לִשְׁמִ֑י כִּ֣י אִ֧ישׁ מִלְחָמ֛וֹת אַ֖תָּה וְדָמִ֥ים שָׁפָֽכְתָּ׃

I Chronicles 28:1-3

(1) David assembled all the officers of Israel—the tribal officers, the divisional officers who served the king, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, and the stewards of all the property and cattle of the king and his sons, with the eunuchs and the warriors, all the men of substance—to Jerusalem. (2) King David rose to his feet and said, “Hear me, my brothers, my people! I wanted to build a resting-place for the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD, for the footstool of our God, and I laid aside material for building. (3) But God said to me,‘You will not build a house for My name, for you are a man of battles and have shed blood.’

דברי הימים א כ״ח:ו׳

(ו) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לִ֔י שְׁלֹמֹ֣ה בִנְךָ֔ הוּא־יִבְנֶ֥ה בֵיתִ֖י וַחֲצֵרוֹתָ֑י כִּֽי־בָחַ֨רְתִּי ב֥וֹ לִי֙ לְבֵ֔ן וַאֲנִ֖י אֶהְיֶה־לּ֥וֹ לְאָֽב׃

I Chronicles 28:6

(6) He said to me,‘It will be your son Solomon who will build My House and My courts, for I have chosen him to be a son to Me, and I will be a father to him.

The prophet may be regarded as the first universal man in history; he is concerned with, and addresses himself to, all men. It was not an emperor, but a prophet, who first conceived of the unity of all men. P. 215

ירמיהו כ״ח:ח׳

(ח) הַנְּבִיאִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֨ר הָי֧וּ לְפָנַ֛י וּלְפָנֶ֖יךָ מִן־הָעוֹלָ֑ם וַיִּנָּ֨בְא֜וּ אֶל־אֲרָצ֤וֹת רַבּוֹת֙ וְעַל־מַמְלָכ֣וֹת גְּדֹל֔וֹת לְמִלְחָמָ֖ה וּלְרָעָ֥ה וּלְדָֽבֶר׃

Jeremiah 28:8

(8) The prophets who lived before you and me from ancient times prophesied war, disaster, and pestilence against many lands and great kingdoms.

ירמיהו א׳:י׳

(י) רְאֵ֞ה הִפְקַדְתִּ֣יךָ ׀ הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֗ה עַל־הַגּוֹיִם֙ וְעַל־הַמַּמְלָכ֔וֹת לִנְת֥וֹשׁ וְלִנְת֖וֹץ וּלְהַאֲבִ֣יד וְלַהֲר֑וֹס לִבְנ֖וֹת וְלִנְטֽוֹעַ׃ {פ}

Jeremiah 1:10

(10)See, I appoint you this dayOver nations and kingdoms:To uproot and to pull down,To destroy and to overthrow,To build and to plant.

The central message of the prophets is the insistence that the human situation can be understood only in conjunction with the dinne situation. The absurdity of isolating the human situation and treating it in disregard of the divine involvement is exemplified by the self defeating course of man-made history. Modern interpretations see history as the arena in which man reigns supreme, with the forces of nature as his only possible adversaries. Man is alone, free, and growing stronger. God is either nonexistent or unconcerned. It is human initiative that makes history, and it is primarily by force that constellations change. Man can attain his own salvation. P. 242

Amos and the prophets who followed him not only stressed the primacy of morality over sacrifice, but even proclaimed that the worth of worship, far from being absolute, is contingent upon moral living, and that when immorality prevails, worship is detestable. Questioning man's right to worship through offerings and songs, they maintained that the primary way of serving God is through love, justice, and righteousness.
This is a paradox to be sure, and like every paradox its opposite is a view that is orthodox. It contains both a negation and an affirmation, the negation being more intelligible than the affirmation. It is difficult for us today to appreciate the boldness and defiance contained in these pronouncements. The distinction between the holy and the profane, between the divine and the mundane, is the basis of religious thinking. A line is drawn between the interests of man and the demands of God. What is it that all gods demand? Sacrifice, incense, reverence for their power. Sacrifice, the strength and the measure of piety, acts wherein God and man meet—all this should be called obnoxious? P. 250

The sacrificial cult was endowed with supreme "political" significance. It was the chief requirement for the security of the land and may be regarded as analogous to the cult of military defense in our own day. Both have their roots in the concern for security. Cease to appease the gods with offerings on the altars, and their anger will strike you down. Sacrifice is a way of preventing the attack. Even as late as the third century of our era "one of the commonest motives for the popular hatred felt toward Christians was the belief that, neglecting the sacrifices themselves and encouraging others to do likewise, they had aroused the fury of the gods against the Empire. In 410, after the capture of Rome by Alaric and his Goths, this prejudice had such power that Augustinus was compelled to answer it; in the first ten books of the City of God, he is engaged in showing that the Christians were not responsible for Rome's misfortunes." P. 251 THIS

מיכה ו׳:ח׳

(ח) הִגִּ֥יד לְךָ֛ אָדָ֖ם מַה־טּ֑וֹב וּמָֽה־יהוה דּוֹרֵ֣שׁ מִמְּךָ֗ כִּ֣י אִם־עֲשׂ֤וֹת מִשְׁפָּט֙ וְאַ֣הֲבַת חֶ֔סֶד וְהַצְנֵ֥עַ לֶ֖כֶת עִם־אֱלֹהֶֽיךָ׃ {ס}

Micah 6:8

(8)“You have been told, O mortal, what is good,And what GOD requires of you: Only to do justiceAnd to love goodness,And to walk modestly with your God;

God's love and kindness indicate a road. It is a road not limited to a particular area in space nor to exceptional miraculous happenings. It is everywhere, at all times. P. 269

תהילים ל״ו:ו׳

(ו) יהוה בְּהַשָּׁמַ֣יִם חַסְדֶּ֑ךָ אֱ֝מ֥וּנָתְךָ֗ עַד־שְׁחָקִֽים׃

Psalms 36:6

(6) O LORD, Your faithfulness reaches to heaven; Your steadfastness to the sky;

עמוס ה׳:כ״ד

(כד) וְיִגַּ֥ל כַּמַּ֖יִם מִשְׁפָּ֑ט וּצְדָקָ֖ה כְּנַ֥חַל אֵיתָֽן׃

Amos 5:24

(24)But let justice well up like water,Righteousness like an unfailing stream.

*Noticing that Gen., ch. 1, has elohim for God, not the Inefiable Name, while in ch. 2 both the Ineffable Name, the Tetragrammaton, and elohim occur, the rabbis remarked that in creating our world, God first intended to rule it according to the principle of strict justice (middath ha-din), but He realized that the world could not thus endure, so He associated mercy (middath ha rahamim) with justice and made them to rule jointly. Elohim signifies strict justice; the Ineffable Name stands for mercy It is maintained that when God acts according to mercy, the Ineffable Name is used, while elohim is used to signify His acting according to strict justice. Mercy has precedence over justice. Both justice and mercy as the main attributes of God's relation to man afford an insight into the polarity of God's dominion. Justice is a standard, mercy an attitude, justice is detachment, mercy attachment; justice is objective, mercy personal. God transcends both justice and mercy. See "Talkut Talmud Torah" in J. Mann, The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue (Heb.; Cincinnati, 1940). P. 281 (Footnote)

On the other hand, the divine pathos is not an absolute force which exists regardless of man, something ultimate or eternal. It is rather a reaction to human history, an attitude called forth by man's conduct; a response, not a cause. Man is in a sense an agent, not only the recipient. It is within his power to evoke either the pathos of love or the pathos of anger. P. 290

Biblical religion begins with God addressing man, with His entering into covenant with man. God is in need of man.* A Supreme Being, apathetic and indifferent to man, may denote an idea, but not the living God of Israel. p. 303

According to Maimonides, any predicate that implies corporeality or passibility must not be applied to God. For all passibility implies change; the agent producing that change cannot be the same as the one who is affected by the change, and if God could be aflected in any way whatever, this would imply that another being beside Him would act on Him and cause change in Him. Maimonides, accepting the Stoic view that "all passion is evil," interprets the statements of the Bible regarding God which in their literal sense predicate certain qualities of Him as not describing characteristics of His essence, but as human ways of understanding His works. Thus when He is called compassionate, this does not mean that He feels compassion, but that He works deeds in regard to His creatures similar to those which with us would proceed from the feeling of compassion.* The same principle holds true of the terms "pain" or "sorrow" when applied to God.s Love alone, according to Crescas, can be attributed to God, and just as man ought to love God, God loves man! P. 324

מורה נבוכים, חלק א' נ״ד:א׳

תוארי הפעולה בטבע, האמת והדרך אליהשתי בקשותיו של משה¹ דע שאדון החכמים, משה רבינו, ביקש שתי בקשות, וקיבל תשובה על שתיהן.
^א) הבקשה האחת, שביקש ממנו יתעלה שיודיע לו את עצמותו ואמיתתו (=מהותו האמיתית),
^ב) והבקשה השנייה, והיא שביקש בתחילה, היא שיודיע לו יתעלה את תאריו. והשיבו יהוה יתעלה על שתי השאלות, בכך
^ב) שהבטיח לו להודיע לו את כל תאריו, ושהם פעולותיו,
^א) והודיע לו שעצמותו לא תושג כפי שהיא, אך הסב את תשומת לבו למקום עיון (=נקודת מבט) שממנו יושג המֵרב של מה שיכול האדם להשיג. ומה שהשיג הוא עליו השלום, לא השיג אדם לא לפניו ולא לאחריו.

Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1 54:1

THE wisest man, our Teacher Moses, asked two things of God, and received a reply respecting both. The one thing he asked was, that God should let him know His true essence: the other, which in fact he asked first, that God should let him know His attributes. In answer to both these petitions God promised that He would let him know all His attributes, and that these were nothing but His actions. He also told him that His true essence could not be perceived, and pointed out a method by which he could obtain the utmost knowledge of God possible for man to acquire. The knowledge obtained by Moses has not been possessed by any human being before him or after him.

מורה נבוכים, חלק א' נ״ד:ב׳

ידיעת יהוה באמצעות הכרת דרכיו בעולם² בקשתו לדעת את תאריו, היא בדבריו: "הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ" (שמות לג,יג). התבונן בדברים המופלאים שכוללת אותה אמירה: דבריו "הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ" מורים על כך שיהוה יתעלה נודע באמצעות תאריו, כי כשיֵדע (האדם) את הדרכים, ידע אותו. ודבריו "לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ" (שם) מורים על כך שהיודע את יהוה – הוא אשר ימצא חן בעיניו, ולא מי שצם ומתפלל בלבד. אלא כל מי שיודע אותו – הרי הוא הרצוי והמקורב, ומי שאינו יודע אותו – הרי הוא השנוא והמרוחק. ולפי שיעור הידיעה והאי ידיעה יהיה (שיעור) הריצוי והשנאה והקרבה והריחוק (לפני ה'). וכבר חרגנו ממטרת הפרק, ואשוב אליה.

Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1 54:2

His petition to know the attributes of God is contained in the following words: “Show me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight” (Exod. 33:13). Consider how many excellent ideas found expression in the words, “Show me thy way, that I may know thee.” We learn from them that God is known by His attributes, for Moses believed that he knew Him, when he was shown the way of God. The words “That I may find grace in thy sight,” imply that he who knows God finds grace in His eyes. Not only is he acceptable and welcome to God who fasts and prays, but everyone who knows Him. He who has no knowledge of God is the object of His wrath and displeasure. The pleasure and the displeasure of God, the approach to Him and the withdrawal from Him are proportional to the amount of man’s knowledge or ignorance concerning the Creator. We have already gone too far away from our subject, let us now return to it.

A major motive for the rejection of the idea of pathos has been the fear of anthropomorphism, by which we mean the endowment of God with human attributes. The religious man denounces not only the idea that the Deity has a body or limbs like a man or an animal, but also the attribution of emotion or passion (anthropopathy) as incompatible with the nature of a Supreme Being. Since divine pathos was regarded as an aspect of anthropomorphism, or more precisely, of anthropopathy, every effort was made either to disregard it or to cancel out its significance. P. 345-346

The notion of God as a perfect Being is not of biblical origin. It is not the product of prophetic religion, but of Greek philosophy; a postulate of reason rather than a direct, compelling, initial answer of man to His reality. In the Decalogue, God does not speak of His perfection, but of His having made free men out of slaves. Signifying a state of being without defect and lack, perfection is a term of praise which we may utter in pouring forth our emotion; yet, for man to utter it as a name for His essence would mean to evaluate and to endorse Him. Biblical language is free of such pretension; it dared to cill perfect (tamim) only "His work" (Deut. 32:4), "His way" (Il Sam. 22:31), and the Torah (Ps. 197). We have never been told:
"Hear, O Israel, God is perfect!" P. 352

God's answer to Jonah, stressing the supremacy of compassion, upsets the possibility of looking for a rational coherence of God's ways with the world. History would be more intelligible if God's word were the last word, final and unambiguous like a dogma or an unconditional decree. It would be easier if God's anger became effective automatically: once wickedness had reached its full measure, punishment would destroy it. Yet, beyond justice and anger lies the mystery of compassion. P. 368

As a mode of pathos, it may be accurate to characterize the anger of the Lord as suspended love, as mercy withheld, as mercy in conceal. ment. Anger prompted by love is an interlude. It is as if compassion were waiting to resume. "I will pluck them up from their land.. and after I have plucked them up, I will again have compassion on them, and I will bring them again each to his heritage and each to his land" P. 378

ירמיהו י״ב:י״ד-ט״ו

(יד) כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יהוה עַל־כׇּל־שְׁכֵנַי֙ הָֽרָעִ֔ים הַנֹּֽגְעִים֙ בַּֽנַּחֲלָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־הִנְחַ֥לְתִּי אֶת־עַמִּ֖י אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל הִנְנִ֤י נֹֽתְשָׁם֙ מֵעַ֣ל אַדְמָתָ֔ם וְאֶת־בֵּ֥ית יְהוּדָ֖ה אֶתּ֥וֹשׁ מִתּוֹכָֽם׃ (טו) וְהָיָ֗ה אַֽחֲרֵי֙ נׇתְשִׁ֣י אוֹתָ֔ם אָשׁ֖וּב וְרִחַמְתִּ֑ים וַהֲשִׁבֹתִ֛ים אִ֥ישׁ לְנַחֲלָת֖וֹ וְאִ֥ישׁ לְאַרְצֽוֹ׃

Jeremiah 12:14-15

(14) Thus said GOD: As for My wicked neighbors who encroach on the heritage that I gave to My people Israel—I am going to uproot them from their soil, and I will uproot the House of Judah out of the midst of them. (15) Then, after I have uprooted them, I will take them back into favor, and restore them all to their own inheritance and their own land.

There are two fundamental types of ecstasy: the wild and fervid type, which is a state of frenzy arising from overstimulation and emotional tension; and the sober or contemplative type, which is a rapture of the soul in a state of complete calmness, enabling a person to rise beyond the confines of consciousness. The motivation for ecstasy lies in the desire for communion with higher being which transcends the grasp of man in his normal condition. It seems that the type of ecstasy one strives for is determined by one's conception of the character of such being. If the god is thought of as a sensuous being, fervid ecstasy would be a way of communion. If the divinity is thought of in terms which stress invisibility, distance, mystery, or incomprehensibility, sober ecstasy would prevail. As illustrations, the Dionysiac frenzy and the Neoplatonic trance may be mentioned. P. 415

The greatest challenge to the religion of Israel was the infatuation of many Hebrews with the cult of the Baalim. The confrontation of Elijah with the prophets of Baal dramatized not only the issue: Who is the true God? but also the issue: How does one approach Him?
Elijah employs neither swords nor lances; he does not mutilate his body, nor go into frenzy. He repairs the altar of the Lord, which was broken down, arranges the offering of the sacrifice, and utters a prayer which, far from being an estatic ejaculation, contains an invocation as well as a declaration of purpose: "Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that Thou art God in Israel, and that I am Thy servant, and that I have done all these things at Thy word" (1 Kings 18:36). It is strange that in all the discussions of prophetic ecstasy, scholars overlooked the significant fact that in the leading prophetic figures berween the time of Moses and the time of Amos, no sign of ecstasy is reported. P. 453

Genius is neither a psychosis nor a neurosis, but is a phenomenon sui generis. Indeed, genius undeniably suffers greatly from "minor nervous disorders."'* However, such disorders may be due to the structure of a society indifferent or even hostile to what a creative soul is trying to convey. Rejection or false recognition, together with the mental stresses and strains, the acts of self-denial necessitated by complete dedication, the effort and agony experienced in trying to bring intuition to expression, are too severe not to affect the sensitive bal ance of a human being. It is a miracle that a creative person manages to survive. P. 504 THIS

Madness (shiggaon), far from being regarded as holy, is mentioned as one of the plagues with which Israel is threatened in the event of disobedience (Deut. 28:28; Zech. 12:4; I Sam. 20:30; 28:30; Dan. 4). References to insanity occur rarely (only two cases are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible)-which stands in sharp contrast to the preoccupation with the phenomena of madness and possession in Greek literature. P. 515

THE ETYMOLOGY OF NABI
The etymology and exact meaning of nabi and its verb forms, nibba', hitnabbe', a matter of much dispute, remain obscure in some points. The verb seems to be connected with the Akkadian nabu, "to call.'* Nabi, a passive like mashiah, "anointed one," nathin, "one given to the Temple as a servant," 'asir, "a prisoner," seems to denote a person who is the passive object of an action from without. Nabi, then, would mean, literally, one who is called (by God), one who has a vocation (from God), as well as one who is subject to the influence of a demon or a false god, and who retains the condition imposed upon him by that call or influence. Corresponding to the meaning of the verb, "to call, to announce," nabi denotes a spokesman, a person charged with delivering a message and who speaks under the authority of someone else. Moses, on refusing to go before Pharaoh, is referred to his brother Aaron, who is to speak in his name. Hence Aaron is called Moses' nabi, prophet (Exod. 7:1) P. 518

שמות ז׳:א׳

(א) וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יהוה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה רְאֵ֛ה נְתַתִּ֥יךָ אֱלֹהִ֖ים לְפַרְעֹ֑ה וְאַהֲרֹ֥ן אָחִ֖יךָ יִהְיֶ֥ה נְבִיאֶֽךָ׃

Exodus 7:1

(1)יהוה replied to Moses, “See, I place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet.

Prophecy, like art, is not an outburst of neurosis, but involves the ability to transcend it when present. It is not simply self-expression, but rather the expression of an ability to rise far above the self or personal needs. Transcendence is its essence. The significance, therefore, is not in the presence of neurosis, but in what a person does with it; one person may end in an asylum, another become an artist. Neurosis should be regarded as that which challenges an artist rather than as that which makes him an artist. It was not Isaiah who produced prophecy; it was prophecy which produced Isaiah. P. 521

And this, too, is a theory: The prophets, like the philosophers of Greece, arrived at their insights by speculation or intuition, but in their desire to impress the people with their authority, they invented a story about revelation. The distinct theological features, the references to the divine origin of their insights, are the result of subsequent literary elaboration. #The prophets were poets who "invested their narratives about the past with the form of a prediction of the future." Out of a desire to impress the people and to bring about a moral or spiritual improvement, and realizing that only a message bearing the stamp of the divine would be effective with their contemporaries, the prophets ascribed their insights to God. Finis sanctificat media. Ezekiel's ability to tell in Babylonia what happened in Jerusalem at the exact moment it happened, and to foretell political events, is explained by asserting that "the entire first part of his book, that is chapters 1-31, are not real prophecies but are only disguised as such. They are, without exception, paticinia post eventum," a prediction uttered in full knowledge of what had already happened. The same opinion is held in regard to the "prophecies" of Second Isaiah.* P. 532

It requires something more than the magic of pretension to have the power to overwhelm men of all ages with the earnestness of one's claim. Can there be any doubt about the intensity of the prophet's certainty? Many of our own convictions seem faint and timid compared with this certainty.
CONFUSION
According to yet another view, the prophets' claims must be explained as the result of their inability to analyze their inner life cor-rectly, of their mistaking a feeling born in the heart for an idea bestowed upon them from without. Prophecy, then, was the result of mental confusion. Here are typical examples of such an explanation.
Prophetic visions were due to hyperaemia of the covering membrane of the brain, to the influence of toxic substances or to anemia of the brain; they are to be regarded as hallucinations, resulting from the combination of normal perceptions and wistfulness gruebelnde Gedanken.)† All prophetic vision is finally the rectilinear continuation of a process, the ultimate foundation of which is in the normal activity of the imagination. P. 533

Was it then the subconscious that acted as a prompter in the experiences of the prophets? Did the Bible arise from the vortex of psychic power, generated by yearning and imagination? Such a view, while not questioning the integrity or sanity of the prophets, would stamp them as deceived deceivers; while not bringing us closer to an understanding of what really took place, it would merely substitute an enigma for the mystery. The subconscious is a hypothesis so wide and so vague that it is hardly more positively known to us than is the idea of the supernatural. How strange that the cunning demon of the subconscious, in spite of its omnipresence and relentless vitality, has not produced elsewhere works of such sublime power! The paths of imagination opened by mythologies were certainly unbounded, but where did they lead to? Where else did a divine idea sanctify history?
Where else did the history of a people become sacred Scripture? P. 539

This is the biblical conception of God's relationship to man: God would call, and man would answer. God is longing for the work of His hands (Job 14:15; cf. 7:21). That relationship is distorted when the call goes forth, and man fails to answer. P. 562

דברים ל״ב:י׳

(י) יִמְצָאֵ֙הוּ֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִדְבָּ֔ר וּבְתֹ֖הוּ יְלֵ֣ל יְשִׁמֹ֑ן יְסֹבְבֶ֙נְהוּ֙ יְב֣וֹנְנֵ֔הוּ יִצְּרֶ֖נְהוּ כְּאִישׁ֥וֹן עֵינֽוֹ׃

Deuteronomy 32:10

(10) [God] found them in a desert region,
In an empty howling waste.
[God] engirded them, watched over them,
Guarded them as the pupil of God’s eye.

הושע ט׳:י׳

(י) כַּעֲנָבִ֣ים בַּמִּדְבָּ֗ר מָצָ֙אתִי֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל כְּבִכּוּרָ֤הֿ בִתְאֵנָה֙ בְּרֵ֣אשִׁיתָ֔הּ רָאִ֖יתִי אֲבוֹתֵיכֶ֑ם הֵ֜מָּה בָּ֣אוּ בַֽעַל־פְּע֗וֹר וַיִּנָּֽזְרוּ֙ לַבֹּ֔שֶׁת וַיִּהְי֥וּ שִׁקּוּצִ֖ים כְּאׇהֳבָֽם׃

Hosea 9:10

(10)I found Israel [as pleasing]As grapes in the wilderness;Your ancestors seemed to MeLike the first fig to ripen on a fig tree.But when they came to Baal-peor,They turned aside to shamefulness;Then they became as detestedAs they had been loved.

In the light of these structural categories, religious events must be divided into two types. They are experienced either as a turning of a transcendent Being toward man, or as a turning of man toward a transcendent Being. The first may be called anthropotropic, the second theotropic.
To the first category belongs the consciousness of being approached by God, directly or indirectly, of receiving teaching or guidance, a word or an intimation; the consciousness of living under a God Who calls upon man, turns to him, is in need of him. In anthropotropic experience, man is affected by the impact of events which he does not initiate, but which are addressed to him or relate to his existence, and in which he feels a transcendent attentiveness focused upon himself. Prophetic inspiration as a pure act may be defined as anthropotropism, as a turning of God toward man, a turning in the direction of man. P. 562-563 THIS

"God and king are two conceptions so nearly coupled in the oriental mind that the distinction is constantly blurred."* The god Re, according to mythology, was the first king in Egypt, and gods were among the rulers in Sumeria after the Flood. Thus, in historic times the king's majesty was equaled to that of a god. The king was held to be a god, begotten by his heavenly father, the sun god Re, who assumed the form of the living king for the purpose of procreation of an heir to the throne. P. 606

Overwhelmingly, mysteriously different from man, God was not the object of imagination. He could not be captured in a myth or comprehended in a concept or a symbol. Challenging, involved, and concerned, His presence pierced the impregnable walls of His other-ness. The dilemma was overcome by abstaining from any claim to comprehend God's essence, His inmost being, or even to apprehend His inscrutable thoughts, unrelated to history, and by insisting upon the ability to understand His presence, expression or manifestation. The prophets experience what He utters, not what He is. P. 620

To the prophet, God is always apprehended, experienced, and conceived as a Subject, never as an object. He appears as One Who demands, as One Who acts, Whose intention is to give righteousness and peace rather than to receive homage or adoration, Whose desire is to bestow rather than to obtain. In all that the prophet knows about God, he never finds in God a desire which does not bear upon man. The prophet does not find God in his mind as object, but finds himself an object in God's mind. To think of Him is to open the mind to His all-pervading, all-penetrating presence. P. 621

A specific aspect of prophetic religion or of the religious phenomenon in general, as opposed to the purely psychological, lies in the fact of a mutual inherence of the "I" and the object of religious experience, for an intention of man toward God produces a counter acting intention of God toward man. Here all mutual relations end, not in the original decision, but in a relationship which represents a counteraction. In turning toward God, man experiences God's turning toward him. Man's awareness of God is to be understood as God's awareness of man, man's knowledge of God is transcended in God's knowledge of man, the subject-man-becomes object, and the object God-becomes subject. Not a reciprocal succession of acts, not a distinguishable alteration of sound and echo, but rather in every event of the religious consciousness it is a question of a dual mutual operation, a two fold mutual initiative. Every apprehension of God is an act of being apprehended by God, every vision of God is a divine vision of man. A mere human aspiration toward God, apart from God's loving election of man, is wide of the mark. For we can think of God only insofar as He thinks of us. The primary factor is our being seen and known by Him for that constitutes the essential content of our vision of God. And so the ultimate element in the object of theological reflection is transcendent divine attention to man, the fact that man is apprehended by God. P.452