With such a righteousness did Jehovah deal with Israel. To her despair that He has forgotten her He recounts the historical events by which He has made her His own, and affirms that He will carry them on; and you feel the expression both of fidelity and of the consciousness of ability to fulfil, in the words, _I will uphold thee with the right hand of My righteousness. Right hand_--there is more than the touch of fidelity in this; there is the grasp of power. Again, to the Israel who was conscious of being His Servant, God says, _I, Jehovah, have called thee in righteousness_; and, taken with the context, the word plainly means good faith and intention to sustain and carry to success. It was easy to transfer the name _righteousness_ from the character of God's action to its results, but always, of course, in the vindication of His purpose and word. Therefore, just as the salvation of Israel, which was the chief result of the Divine purpose, is called Israel's righteousness, so it is also called _Jehovah's righteousness_. Thus, in xlvi. 13, _I bring near My righteousness_; and in li. 5, _My righteousness is near, My salvation is gone forth_; ver. 6, _My salvation shall be for ever, and My righteousness shall not be abolished._ It seems to be in the same sense, of finished and visible results, that the skies are called upon _to pour down righteousness, and the earth to open that they may be fruitful in salvation, and let her cause righteousness to spring up together_ (xlv. 8; _cf._ lxi. 10, _My Lord Jehovah will cause righteousness to spring forth_). One passage is of great interest, because in it _righteousness_ is used to play upon itself, in its two meanings of human duty and Divine effect--lvi. 1, _Observe judgement_--probably religious ordinances--_and do righteousness; for My salvation is near to come, and My righteousness to be revealed_. * * * * * To complete our study of _righteousness_ it is necessary to touch still upon one point. In Isa. xl.-lxvi. both the masculine and feminine forms of the Hebrew word for righteousness are used, and it has been averred that they are used with a difference. This opinion is entirely dispelled by a collation of the passages. I give the particulars in a note, from which it will be seen that both forms are indifferently employed for each of the many shades of meaning which _righteousness_ bears in our prophecies.[138] That the masculine and feminine forms sometimes occur, with the same or with different meanings, in the same verse, or in the next verse to one another, proves that the selection of them respectively cannot be due to any difference in the authorship of our prophecy. So that we are reduced to say that nothing accounts for their use, except, it might be, the exigencies of the metre. But who is able to prove this? FOOTNOTES: