The prophets and the promise

Front matter

THE GIFT OF -

,, Cornell University Library

Prophets and the promise being for subst olln

Preface

In part the Stone lectures as delivered were a selection from the materials of this volume, and in part the volume is an expansion of the lectures. It is a product of studies accumulating during many years, rather than a predirected discussion of a subject, but I hope that it will not be found deficient in logical coherence.

The presentation it makes is essentially a restatement of the Christian tradition that was supreme fifty years ago, but a restatement with differences so numerous and important that it will probably be regarded, by men who do not think things through, as an attack on that tradition. If what I have said makes that impression on any one, and if he regards the matter as of sufficient importance, I ask him to consider it more carefully. I have tried to make my search a search for the truth, without undue solicitude as to whether its results are orthodox; but it seems to me that my conclusions are simply the old orthodoxy, to some extent transposed into the forms of modern thought, and with some new elements introduced by widening the field of the induction.

It follows, of course, that my position is antagonistic to that of the men who attack the older tradition. But I have tried not to be polemic. I have tried to give due consideration to the views of the men with whom I differ. Where practicable, I have preferred the broader statements, in which we are in agreement, to the narrower ones that would emphasize our differences.

Preface To The Second Edition

I AM grateful for much kind praise tiiat has been accorded to "The Prophets and the Promise," and not less so for some adverse criticism. The latter connects itself especially with my claim that the book is essentially a restatement of old-fashioned ideas. This claim is challenged both by those who regard the old-fashioned ideas as absurd, and regard me as stupid for holding them, and by those who themselves hold old-fashioned ideas and blame me for having departed from them.

In many matters concerning God and his revelation of himself to men we are only able to speak anthropomorphically. Often an uttered religious truth is a reality expressed in picture language. Toward such a truth three mental attitudes are possible. When our minds are sufficiently sympathetic and alert, we see the reality as expressed through the picture, and the truth is clear because we rightly recognize the truth. But when the form of expression has become traditional, men often come to it with minds that are not thus sympathetically alert. In that case some persons will affirm the truth, but will treat the picture element as if it were flat mechanical fact, thus forming ideas that are utterly inadequate ; and yet other persons will deny the truth, assuming that because there is picture there is no reality.

Nothing is more common than to repeat certain mechanical statements concerning God and the prophets, vi PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

as if these constituted the old church tradition on the subject. Those who attack the tradition use these statements, and they are accepted by some who defend the tradition. To my mind, statements of this kind are not truly representative of the doctrine which the religion of Jehovah has taught and now teaches. The genuine orthodoxy is that which clings to the proper signification of the orthodox statements, and not to some faded and changed understanding of them. In some men's minds there exists a conception of a desiccated orthodoxy, made up of formulas which have lost their sap of meaning, of husks from which the kernel has vanished. There are other men, however, who see the vital meanings which originally gave life to the formulas, and who see that these meanings are eternally vital. One may be content to be found in the company of such men.

WILLIS J. BEECHER.

August, 1908.

Chapter I Preliminary Face

Scope of the work 3

I. Sources. The scriptures as a source. Direct study versus general reading. Is the testimony credible ? Direct examination versus cross-examination. Dependence on critical questions. The provisionally historical point of view. Evidence tested by use . . 4

II. Interpreting the sources. Avoid eisegesis. Eisegesis of Christian doctrine. Of negative assumptions. Of theories of religion. Of particular schemes of Comparative Religion, A true method 9

III. Points concerning the treatment. Outline. Certain matters

of detail IS

Chapter II

Prophet. Nabhi and its cognates. Hhozeh and its cognates. Roeh and its cognates. The uses of raah and hhazah, Man of God. Word of Yahaweh. Saith Yahaweh. Man of the Spirit, Massa. Hittiph. Metaphorical terms 21

Terms used at all dates. Interchangeable as to the person denoted. Three degrees of extension. Raving 32

Chapter III

Introductory. The subject attractive. Division into periods . 36 I. Prophecy in the times before Samuel. Before Abraham. The patriarchs as prophets. Prophecy in the times of Moses and

vii viii CONTENTS

PAGE

Joshua. In the times of the Judges. The dearth of prophecy in the

time of Eli 38

II. Prophecy in the times of Samuel and later. First period, that of Samuel, David, and Nathan : the great names, the organizations, the terms that are used. Second period, from the disruption to Elisha : distinguished prophets, " the sons of the prophets," false prophets, the use of terras. Third period, that of Amos and Isaiah : the great prophets, the numbers of the prophets true and false, the use of terms. Fourth period, that of Jeremiah and others : the great names, the many prophets true and false. Fifth period, the exilian prophets : the great names and the many prophets true and false. Sixth period, the postexilian prophets : the great names and the many other prophets. The cessation of prophecy . . 47

Chapter IV The Prophet. A Citizen With A Message

The question. How affected by one's critical position ... 66

I. External appearance of the prophet. Baseless current ideas. Unearthly phenomena absent. Was there a prophetic costume ? The facts significant even if negative. Did the prophets rave?

The prophets long-lived 67

II. The organizations of the prophets. Samuel's " companies."

The Naioth institutioti. " The sons of the prophets " . . -76

III. The so-called prophetic order. Holy orders. The prophets a succession. They had no priestly character. Was the prophet a graduate ? Ordination. How one became a prophet ... 80

The prophet especially a manly man. The absence of insignia noteworthy 85

Chapter V The Functions Of A Prophet— Naturalistic And Supernaturalistic

Introductory. Guarding against mistaken assumptions. The name indicates the function. Passages that outline the prophetic function .88

I. Naturalistic functions. They were public men. Jeremiah as a statesman. Isaiah and Hosea as statesmen. Prophetic ideal of a reunited Israel. Elijah and Elisha as statesmen. The prophets were reformers. Some of their reforms. They were preachers of

CONTENTS ix good tidings. They were literary men. Certain points need to be guarded. Different grades and kinds of prophets. The prophet both local and cosmopolitan. The sense in which devout persons

or great leaders are prophets 93

II. Supernaturalistic functions. The prophets claim them. Working of miracles, disclosing of secrets, prediction, the giving of torah, the messianic forecast. Revealers of the monotheism of Yahaweh 105

Chapter VI The Prophets Message

I. How given to him. The source of his inspiration is the Spirit of Yahaweh. Utterances inspired by the Spirit. Deeds inspired by the Spirit. Micaiah's lying Spirit. The nature of the Spirit of Yahaweh. The modes in which the prophet received his message. Classification of them. Dreams. The interpreting of dreams. Picture-vision. Visions of insight. Hhazah versus raah. Vision other than by sense-images. Theophany. Its forms. The Angel. Theophany versus picture-vision. The notable absence of artificial excitation no

II. How uttered by him. Prophetic object lessons. Types. No double meanings. Manifold fulfilment. Generic prophecy. The art of persuasive speech 125

Chapter VII The Prophet As A Giver Of Torah And Writer Of Scripture

General statements 133

I. The term "law" in later writings. Current use. Use in Jewish literature, later and earlier. In the New Testament. In

the Apocrypha 134

II. The term " law " in the Old Testament. Derivation of torah and horah. Torah is from Deity. Is authoritative. Revealed through prophets. Guarded and administered by priests. Interpreted by both. No separate priestly torah. Its forms. Oral or written. A particular revelation. An aggregate. The noun used abstractly. The known and definite aggregate. Some section of

the aggregate 139

CONTENTS

The nature of the ioraA-SLggiegate. Limitations of the term. Examination of instances. From earlier records of the Mosaic times. From Deuteronomy and the writings that presuppose it. From the earlier prophetic books. The ioraA not primarily the pentateuch. Law and Prophets and Writings from the first. A separate pentateuch ? The iora/i and the Old Testament. , Some sources were ioraA and others not. Five iorai-piod\icing periods. Not three canons. Later emergence of the threefold division . . 155

III. The prophets as writers of scripture. As bringers of /orak. Their authority the highest. All scripture equally of prophetic authority 168

Chapter VIII The Promise-doctrine As Taught In The New Testament

Introductory. The Christian messianic idea distinctive. Messianic prediction, prophecy, doctrine. The proposition . . -175

I. The New Testament claim. That there is one promise. The promise to Abraham. Consisting of many promises. The theme of

the whole Old Testament. Pervading all New Testament thought ' . 1 79

II. The use made of the claim. The promise eternally operative and irrevocable. Jesus Christ its culminating fulfilment. The gentiles share in the benefit of it. It underlies the great doctrines of the gospel : the kingdom, immortality, the Holy Ghost, redemption from sin 185

Concluding statements. Recapitulation. A Christocentric theology 192

Chapter IX The Promise As Given To The Patriarchs

Outline of treatment. Pre-Abrahamic passages .... ige I. The promise as made. Earliest statement. Its subordinate items. The principal item emphasized. Qimacteric order. Five times repeated. The name Abraham. Seed. Covenants. Peculiar people. The promise eternally operative. This emphasized. Therefore of progressive fulfilment. The seed a continuing unit . 197

CONTENTS xi

PAGE

II. Problems concerning the promise. How affected by critical theories. What is true according to all theories. The contemporary understanding of the promise. In what sense they understood it to be predictive. Its value as practical doctrine . . . 207

Chapter X The Promise As Renewed To Israel And To David

I. For the times of the exodus. Israel Yahaweh's people Yahaweh's son. Separative institutions. For eternity. Irrevocable even for sin. Rest. Has mankind a share in this ? That all may know Yahaweh, " My own, out of all the peoples." A kingdom of priests. Continuity with the patriarchal revelation. Consistent with the treatment of Amalek and the Canaanite. Critical point of view. Contemporary interpretation 217

II. For the times of David. 2 Samuel vii. David's house. His seed. The temple builder. Line of kings. An eternal kingdom. Irrevocable even for sin. In continuation with the promise to Abraham and Israel, and therefore for mankind. The rest promise. " To thee for a people." " One nation in the earth," Yahaweh's son. The tora^ of mankind. Critical views. Contemporary interpretation 2z8

Chapter XI The Promise-doctrine Of The Prophets And Psalmists

Introductory. Recapitulation. A new phase. The messianic dogma. Its homiletical presentation 241

I. Modes of expressing it. The predictive passages. A sermon text or a proof text. Repeating the old phrases. Amplifying them. Psalm Ixxxix. Celebration songs. Technical terms and collateral lines. Presupposition oftener than open statement . . . 245

II. The matters which they emphasize. The three promises the same. The promise cosmopolitan. The temple for the nations. Israel for the nations. The promise for eternity and irrevocable. Modes of thinking that it created. Israel as the people of the promise. Mediatorial suffering 252

Critical questions 261 xii CONTENTS

Chapter XII Messianic Terms. The Servant Face

Introductory. Recapitulation. Rise of technical terms. " Servant " the most conspicuous term. Isaiah xl-lxvi .... 263

I. Two auxiliary matters. First, national personality in the Hebrew. Second, presuppositions of the promise history . . 265

II. The -Servant. Outline. Instances in which the Servant is said to be Israel. Interpreting the instances. The promise point of view. The Israel of the promise. Instances that are less explicit. Servants. The Servant speaking in the first person. Israel's mission to himself. Isaiah xlii. 1-4. Isaiah lii. 13-liii. Mediatorial sufferings 270

III. Servant a representative term. Two one-sided interpretations. The true interpretation. Universalness. A glimpse at the fulfilments 285

Chapter XIII

MESSIANIC TERMS. THE KINGDOM AND ITS ANOINTED KING

I. The kingdom. In the earliest times. The time of Eli. From David onward. In the psalms and prophecies. Yahaweh's kingdom. Universal peace. Independent of disputed dates. A kingdom of influence . . . . . . . . . . 289

II. The anointed king. The words " anoint," " anointed." Correct form of the question. The Messiah as a coming person. Transition to the New Testament idea ...... 298

III. The eschatological trend. The latter days. The day of Yahaweh. That day. History of the phrase. Exodus. Joel. Obadiah, Amos, and others. Always impending. The New Testament presentation 304

Chapter XIV

MESSIANIC TERMS. YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH. OTHER TERMS

I. Hhasidh. Its derivation and meaning. Outline of instances. Yahaweh as hhasidh. The hhasidhim are Israelites as people of the promise. Not a sect. Israel a hhasidh nation. Hhasidh as equivalent to Anointed one. The instances where the readings vary. Summary. The Asideans. In the New Testament . , 313

CONTENTS xiii

II. The Chosen one. MeshuUam. The Called one. Jeshurun. Yahaweh's Son. Sons of promise. The virgin mother. The Branch. Netser. Nagidh, that is, Regent. " My Lord " in Fsalm ex . . 329

The common characteristics of the messianic terms . , . 342

Chapter XV

Introductory. Recapitulation. The Person of the promise. That in him which js extraordinary. Genesis xlix. 10. Psalm ex. To what extent a reality. A nucleus for doctrine. Both typical and antitypal 344

I. The prophets themselves types of the Person of the promise. Deuteronomy xviii . 350

II. The theophanic Angel in his relations to the promise. In

the earliest times. At the exodus. In later times. In Malachi . 352

III. Israel's institutions as typical of the promise. The ark and the mercy seat. The sacred year. Some worshippers had insight.

Israel's priesthood. Victim and priest 357

. IV. Other matters. Persons or objects as types. Particular passages. In fine, almost all Old Testament details .... 361

Chapter XVI Messianic Expectation And Fulfilment

I. The expectation in the time of Jesus. Sources. A temporal deliverer ? More adequate statement. The promise-doctrine known. Not a Pauline view merely. The kingdom expected. And its Anointed king. Heir of David. But many unsettled points. There were spiritual expectations. Especially of redemption from sin. False messiahs 365

II. How the promise has been fulfilled. As a promise, and not mere prediction. An eternal fulfilment necessarily cumulative. National and cosmopolitan and through a Person. In what sense may Jesus be the fulfilment ? A summary of the fulfilling facts. Exclusive Jewish interpretation. Exclusive Christian interpretation. The true Jewish-Christian interpretation. Fulfilment in the ethnical Israel, in the religions of Yahaweh, in Christ 375 ,j xiv CONTENTS

Chapter XVII The Apologetic Value Of Prophecy Page

Introductory. The old argument. Need of restatement. Our conclusions thus far provisional; are they true ? Theistic presuppositions 387

I. Recapitulation. The prophet as we have found him. Prediction as we have found it. Messianic doctrine as we have found

it. The gospel in the Old Testament as we have found it . . 391

II. The argument. From the presentment of the prophet. The biblical ideal a true ideal. Apologetic bearings. Its concept of divine revelation. From the presentment of the national ideal. The bearing of critical theories. The significance of the ideal. How is it to be accounted for ? A contrasting ideal. The prophetic mode of presentation. From historical verisimilitude. Self-consistency. The promise-doctrine as a solution of difficulties. Credibility. Unmiraculous events. Miraculous events. Intelligible continuity. Bearings in the argument. From fulfilled prediction. Has the promise been kept ? The thing promised exceptional. Fulfilled in the secular history of Israel. Eternal fulfilment ? Mediatorial suffering. The argument not trivial. Fulfilled in the three religions of Yahaweh. Their civilizational results. Their spiritual results. Fulfilled in the person of Jesus. A futile objection. No need that Apologetics surrender historical fact 394

Chapter I

The prophets of Israel: what manner of men they were, their functions, naturalistic or supernaturalistic, how their messages were given to them and how uttered by them, their part in the writing of the scriptures, the doctrine they taught concerning Israel's peculiar relations to Deity and to mankind, the messianic kingdom they heralded and its king, and the value of their mission for the current illustration and defence of the Christian religion, — this theme and these topics under it are certainly not new. They are familiar, trite, commonplace. Yet it seems to me that in this field a painstaking student may still hope to gather something. The older treatments seem to me inadequate, by reason of a certain lack of insight into the literary character of the sources and into the nature of historical movements, and by reason of too great reliance on traditional interpretations. The newer treatments seem to me yet more inadequate, by reason of the too easy rejection of portions of the testimony, and the too ready substitution of conjecture for evidence. Both leave something to be desired in this field of study, and something that is not beyond the reach of diligence and industry.

Without taking time to discuss thoroughly the principles that should govern such an investigation as this, I shall try to present, in this preUminary chapter, a few considerations touching the sources to be used and the interpretation of them, followed by a brief outline of the treatment that will be attempted.

I. The Old Testament is our one direct source of information concerning the prophets and their teachings. Indirect sources are, first, the New Testament and other later writings, including the evidence of the monuments; second, analogies drawn from other religions, or from later times, or from our theories or opinions.

Of these sources the Old Testament, supplemented at some points by the New, is principal, and all others Thescri ^"^^ Subsidiary. Simple as this fact is, it is tures as a imperative that we pay it due attention. Our source generation is much in the habit of substitut-

ing superficial reading for careful study. If a person has read a hundred volumes, in six or seven languages, concerning the prophets, he is in danger of fancying that he has done more work on the subject than if he had carefully examined all that the Old and New Testaments say about them. To avoid being misled, he should have it in mind that the hundred volumes contain very little real information save that which has been drawn from these principal sources. Nineteentwentieths of all that we really know on this subject comes from the bible. Only the other twentieth comes from extrabiblical tradition, or from rnonuments, or from the analogy of other religions, or by inference from the theories we hold, or from our general knowledge of things and men.

My purpose is, mainly, to reexamine the evidence

PRELIMINARY J

found in the Old and New Testaments. To some this programme will seem exceedingly simple and rudimentary. They would think it a greater thing to ^j^^ ^^^^ read many books, and discuss the bearing of of original their contents on the subject in hand. But *'"'^'' no amount of reading can supersede the necessity of examining for ourselves the direct evidence in the case. Just this has been more neglected than anything else in dealing with the subject of the prophets of Israel. Men of learning as well as others have neglected it. We must do this first of all, and do it with care, or all other study of the subject will be of little value to us.

Men have assumed that they were already familiar with what the Old Testament says concerning the prophets, when they were not really so ; and have hastened on prematurely to the examination of the collateral branches of the evidence. Many of the current statements as to what the Old Testament says are based on analogies, or on later traditions, to a much greater extent than on the actual testimony of the Old Testament. Such statements are instances of mistaken method. The direct evidence in the case is not only the most important, but it is essential to the correct understanding of the indirect evidence. The indirect evidence can genuinely assist in interpreting the direct only on condition of its being itself interpreted by the direct. In Old Testament studies, the thing now more needed than anything else is a more correct knowledge of what the Old Testament says. Always the beginner should begin by attaining to this correct knowledge; and at present, in Old Testament work, this is the need of advanced scholars as well as of beginners.

At once we see the importance of the question of the degree of credence to be accorded to the testimony of In what our principal sources. If we hold to a divine fhftestimony inspiration that guarantees the remarkable credible? truthfulness of all parts of the bible, it does not therefore follow that we must take this doctrine as a presupposition in our historical study of the prophets. And if one holds that the bible is full of mistaken statements, that does not justify him in an undiscriminating rejection of the statements concerning the prophets. Both as a matter of correct method, and for the sake of convincing those with whom we differ, we should waive, at the outset, all questions of inspiration, and treat our sources merely as literature that has come down to us from a remote past. In respect to trustworthiness we will make no stronger claim than this : that statements of fact found in the Old and New Testaments are to be provisionally regarded as true except as reasons appear to the contrary.

This is not an extravagant claim to make for the truthfulness of the scriptures. Our courts would accord as much credence as this, not to a reputable witness only, but even to a witness who is a jailbird or a harlot or a noted liar. If statements of fact are self-contradictory, or contrary to known truth, we will not accept them. Even if they are seemingly credible we will at the outset accept them only provisionally, till we can test them by their results when we bring them into combination with other truths. We will fully admit the principle that human historians often make mistakes. But this we must insist upon : that statements of fact are to be provisionally accepted unless there are substantial reasons for not accepting them.

It follows that in using the testimony of the Old and New Testaments on this and other questions, we ought to begin with a direct examination, and not Direct exwith a cross-examination. We ought to take ^i"^''""

o versus cross-

the trouble to understand what their statements examination mean, in the form in which they have come down to us, as preliminary to testing the truth of them, and either accepting or rejecting them.

As our investigation depends largely on the question of the historical correctness of the aifirmations of the bible, so it depends indirectly on questions ^^ endence concerning the structure, the date, and the on critical authorship of the books. For these have 1"^^"°"^ their bearing on the question of historicity, and also on the question of the interpretation of the statements we find. Yet we need not wait till all these other questions are settled before we begin our studies concerning the prophets. Indeed, many of the questions concerning the prophets are more simple and primary than the others, and therefore ought to be studied first, that the results reached may assist us in our inquiries into matters that are less obvious.

Our first inquiry is : What are the representations of the Old Testament in regard to the prophets ? In other words : What manner of men were the proph- „,

^ ^ The provi-

ets, supposing the statements of the Old sionai point Testament concerning them to be historical, ° "^^ so far as they purport to be so, and supposing them also to be correct .' From the point of view of all parties this is a fair question. It is supposable that, in seeking the answer, we may find the statements of the Old Testament unsatisfactory, but at the outset the question is a fair one. On the supposition that the Old Testament gives a truthful account of the prophets of Israel, what is that account ? We do not affirm that it gives a truthful account; we do not deny it; we simply suppose it.

It is wisest to start from this point of departure, not trying to settle beforehand all questions in regard to the character or the trustworthiness of our data, but using them at first as provisional, and as leading only to provisional results. We shall surely test the data as we advance. If they are not trustworthy, we shall find it out. If they are trustworthy, we shall see them to be so, and shall thus transform our provisional results into final results.

These last considerations are important. How shall we determine whether statements of fact found in any Use as a test source are to be depended upon? There is of evidence jjo better test than that of actual use. By carefully examining what the Old Testament says on such a subject as the prophets, we may form a judgment concerning the Old Testament as a source of evidence. Certain schools of criticism deny that these books are historically valid, asserting that they are full of anachronisms and inconsistencies and absurdities. In case this is so, we shall be pretty sure to find traces of the unhistorical character of the books, if we carefully examine some section of them, running through different chronological periods. Such a section for testing them is afforded in what they say concerning the prophets. This is found scattered through all the books, including a vast number of details and allusions, belonging to periods of time separated by centuries. It is conceivable beforehand that we may find these details so confused and inconsistent as to be incredible in many points, and that we may be compelled to estimate the books accordingly. On the other hand, if we find their account of the prophets to be throughout consistent and probable, that will be an argument of no little weight in favor of the historical trustworthiness of the books themselves.

Thus our attitude toward these writings and their testimony is at the outset neutral. It will not remain so. As the investigation proceeds we shall inevitably either gain or lose confidence in the witnesses.

II. In the interpretation of our sources, and especially of the Old Testament, there is one point in particular in which we need to be sedulously on our guard. That is the point where we are in danger of substituting an eisegetical treatment for an exegetical.

None of us come to this study as to a new and unfamiliar subject. We already have pretty distinct ideas concerning the prophets and their activities, Eisegesis is and in particular concerning messianic predic- tobeavoided tion, and the meaning and use of the term Messiah. It is supposable that our preconceived ideas may be crude and misleading. We can decide this only by holding them in suspense until we can test them by the facts we find by study. We cannot be too jealously careful against the process of merely first putting our ideas into the Old Testament passages, and then dipping them out again. There is especial danger of eisegesis from two sources. Christian theology and theories of Comparative Religion.

We must avoid alike the carrying back of Christian ideas into the Old Testament and the neglecting of those ideas that belong to the Old Testament in common with Christianity.

When we are studying the Old Testament we ought not to import into it ideas drawn from the New Testament, or from some scheme of Christian messianic theology. This rule is nowadays often laid down ; if we lO THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

violate it, we shall not do so for lack of being warned ; but it is a correct rule. And we shall not properly observe Eise esis of ^* unless wc take pains. We are familiar, for Christian example, with a certain interpretation of what doctrine ^^^ -^^^ Testament says concerning Jesus as the Messiah, and we go to the Old Testament looking for the same teaching expressed in similar terms. In this way we are likely to find what we are looking for, whether it is there or not. We sometimes find things where they are not. We put the idea into the passage, instead of looking to see what is already in the passage ; and then, by way of interpretation, we take out just what we have put in, possibly a little miscolored by the process.

This way of studying the Old Testament is all the more dangerous because it is not altogether valueless. The method of interpreting the Old Testament by the light of the New is within its proper limits correct. Even when the method is incorrectly used, such study is study. Though faulty, it may, especially in the case of persons who have spiritual insight, result in the reaching of truth. Critically bad as this way of learning is, we cannot afford to forego it save as we can replace it by something better.

Nevertheless it is logically bad. It is contrary to accepted laws of investigation. There are grave objections to it. First, it is needless. All the truth it yields is equally attainable by methods that will stand the test of correct criticism. Second, it is perilous. The truth we thus reach, though genuinely true, has yet been inferred from premises that can be shown to be false. There is danger that when we come to see that the premises are false, our confidence in the truth will be shaken. Third, it is wasteful. By this particular way of learning the Old Testament through the New we obtain from it nothing but a pale reflection of the New. This is a great loss. In a wide range of truths the Old Testament is more rudimentary, and therefore simpler and fuller than the New. It is capable of illuminating the New, and not merely of being illuminated by it. When so much light is ready to glow, we cannot afford to take a point of view which brings the object perpetually into the shadow.