y. It owes its origin in part to
prophetic, in part to priestly, activity. The prophet was an
ambassador of Jehovah appointed to make known the divine will
concerning the past, the present, and the future. Of the present he
spoke as a preacher; when his message concerned the future it took the
form of prediction; but the case might arise that the people failed to
understand the significance of events in their own history, and {20}
thus failed to appreciate the lessons which the events were intended to
teach. If these lessons were not to be lost, some one must serve as an
interpreter, and who would be better qualified to furnish the right
interpretation than the prophet? This demand made of him, in a sense,
an historian, not for the purpose of merely recording events but of
interpreting them at the same time, and these prophetic interpretations
are embodied in the historical literature originating with the prophets.

But not all Old Testament history comes from the prophets. As already
indicated, the legal and ceremonial literature is due to priestly
activity. Now, in connection with the recording of the laws, customs,
institutions, and ceremonial requirements, the origin of these laws and
customs became a matter of interest and importance. This interest, and
the demand for information arising from it, led the priests also to
become historians. And to these priestly writers we are indebted for
not a small part of sacred history.

The third truth taught by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews is
that God spoke unto the fathers in or by the prophets, which means,
that he used _human agents_ to mediate his revelations. The Old
Testament may be more than a human production; nevertheless, it will be
{21} impossible to appreciate it adequately unless it is borne in mind
that it contains a human element. In the first place may be noted the
differences in style between various writers. These are frequently the
outgrowth of differences in temperament and early training. Even the
English reader can notice such differences between Amos and Hosea, or
between Isaiah and Jeremiah. Evidently, whatever divine cooperation
the biblical writers enjoyed, they retained enough of their human
faculties and powers to make use of their own peculiar styles.

Again, the hand of man may be seen in the manner of literary
composition. Most Bible students are familiar with the opening words
of the Gospel of Luke: "Forasmuch as man