A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

VERSE 1. Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself: according to the multitude of his fruit, he hath increased the al∣tars, according to the goodness of his land, they have made goodly images.

IN this Chapter he proceeds to set forth the great wickedness of Israel, and de∣nounce his judgments against them for it. Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself, &c. (or as it is in the margin) a vine emptying the fruit which it giveth. These two differing rendrings, one by our translators put in the text, the other in the margin, shew that the words are of something doubtful in∣terpretation; and we shall have reason so to think, if we look on the many other rend∣rings and expositions which we find given, of which some are harsh and obscure enough: so many and so different are they, that a man would scarce imagine that they should all be from, or belong to, the same words; and I scarce know to what method to reduce them. The plainest way of proceeding I think will be to give the reader a view of several of the chief of them, and leave him to his own choice and judgement. Yet before we so do, it may be convenient to set down, and say something of those words about which the difference is, which are first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gephen, a vine, to which Israel is elsewhere compared, as Psal. 80.8. Isa. 5.2. first, a noble, then a degenerate vine, Jer. 2.21. 2^dly. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bokek, by ours tran∣slated, empty. 3^dly. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yeshaveh, by them translated bringeth forth, or as in the margin giveth. As for the first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gephen, by all it is agreed on, that it signifies, a vine, the difference is concerning the Gender whether it be alwayes feminine, or as well masculine, as here; and then concerning the Case, whe∣ther it be the nominative or accusative: As for the second 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek, whether it be transitive or intransitive, and whether, as to the lignification, it have the notion of empti∣ness alone, or else may import on the contra∣ry abundance; for in both we shall find it by them taken. If we search for it in this form, in other places of the Scripture, to see how it is there taken, we shall scarce there find it but taken transitively, and in the notion of emptiness, or emptying, as Nah. 2.2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ci bekakum bokekim, for the empti∣ers have emptied them out, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek haarets, Isa. 24.1. Maketh the earth empty, as likewise in the Preterperfect tense, Jer. 19.7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ubakkothi eth at∣sat, And I will make void the counsel of Judah, nor is there elsewhere any example produced in which, in this form, it is used intransitively, or in any other (at least a contrary) notion but by such as here so take it. As for the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh, the root thereof shavah be∣ing used (in several forms at least) in the seve∣ral notions of putting, bringing, or making pre∣sent, or of being equal, or convenient, or profi∣table, or of being false or vain ( a 1.1 as if it were the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) which of them is most congruous to this place; and then again, as to the fruit here spoken of, whether it be meant of b 1.2 spiritual fertility, a∣bounding or failing in graces and good works, or temporal, as abounding in wealth, chil∣dren, and outward prosperity. From the dif∣ferent opinions of Interpreters as to these things, are the grounds of these so many dif∣ferent rendrings as we meet with; as by in∣stancing in some of the chief of them will ap∣pear. To begin with some of the antientest, reserving our own to be considered in the last place, to which the reader, if it seem te∣dious to him to take a view of the rest, may passing over them, please to direct his eyes.

The LXX. render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Israel is a vine of fair branches, the fruit thereof is abundant. So Je∣rome reads it, and thinks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to sound, bonas habens propagines. But other copies have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 c 1.3 having many branches, and some, as appears by many copies, prefer the d 1.4 former of these readings, e 1.5 others the latter. Both of them fall in together as to this, that Israel is a vine that sent forth many fair branches; to which agree also those other Greek rend∣rings which Jerome mentions, as that of Sym∣machus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, woody, full of wood or bran∣ches, and of Aquila, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 f 1.6 full of water or sap, (though that Jerome takes to signify in ill part, watery or bringing out wine that hath no savour or relish in it. The LXX. are

by the printed Arab. followed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Israel is a vine that shooteth out well, (or fair branches) whose fruit is plentiful. The Syriac to the same purpose 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Israel is a vine of branches that hath brought forth fruit. With them also doth the vulgar La∣tin well agree, which is, vitis frondosa Israel, fructus adaequatus est ei, which the Doway English, Israel a vine thick of branches, (full of leaves, they might have rendred it) the fruit is made equal to it. And what else will that sound, but that the fruit thereof is plentiful and abounding? viz. as the branches or leaves are, g 1.7 one agreeable to the other, though Lyra ex∣pound it was equal, i. e. did suffice, Quan∣tumcunque populus crevisset, &c. How much soever the people increased, the fruit of their land sufficed to sustain them, but this abundance was to them a cause of departing from God according to what is said, Deut. 32 15. Jesurum waxed sat and kicked, which Petr. à Figu. censures as not apposite to this place, it denotes emptiness of fruit, or we may say, empty fruit, such as from a vine shooting all into branches might be expected. Which significa••ion therefore of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shavah viz. to be equal, may per∣haps the other likewise seem to have respected, while they expressed the meaning of it in the place, though not the literal signification of it; or else to have taken that other significati∣on of it, as it denotes, to put, or make pre∣sent, or produce; it will come much to one pass.

As to the first word Bokek these all manifest∣ly agree, viz. in the notion of plentifulness, in that kind spoken of, contrary to that of em∣ptiness and defect, which as we say is usually given to it in other places of Scripture; in which those also give it such significations as may be reduced thereto, rather than to this, which they here give it; thinking it seems the sense here to require that it be so under∣stood, and having received and learned by such helps as they then had, that it did so also signify, though in a notion almost contra∣ry to the other. And that it so did and was known so to do, is made, if not manifest, yet certainly very probable, by the use of the same theme or word in the Arabick tongue of so nigh affinity with the Hebrew, that, (as we have elsewhere said) the learneder Rabbins when any doubt occurs to them concerning the signification of some more unusual Hebrew word, have usually recourse thereto, to expe∣dite the matter to them: and in that the theme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakak or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakka, is according to an usual notion of it known to denote to bring forth plentifully, or in abundance, for so of the heavens it is said, h 1.8 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakkat as∣samao, the heaven poured out much rain, and of a fruitful teeming woman, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakkati ilmarato, she is fruitful in children, or hath brought forth many children, and such a woman is called i 1.9 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 albakkato, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aliso is to spread in greatness, and spoken of a plant, to budd or spread forth, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakkak is a man of many words, a great talk∣er, and the like words have they including the notion of plenty and abundance: so that whereas k 1.10 a very learned modern divine saith, that if it could be proved that the word Bokek had such signification, the interpretation of the LXX. and such as follow them, should very well please him. I suppose that which we have said may serve in good part to take a∣way all scruple of that.

That being granted, the exposition of the place would be, that Israel hitherto was as a flourishing and fruitful vine, prospering and abounding in plenty of all good things, in wealth and multitudeof children, and had made very ill use of such of Gods blessings, as in the following words is described, according to the multitude of his fruit he hath increased the altars, &c. viz. abusing all the plenty which God had given them by expending it on Idols, and their service, so that these words will be as a rea∣son of what was before threatned, c. 9.16. that Ephraim was, or should be smitten, and their root dried up, and that God would sub∣tract his blessings from them, namely, because when they abounded in all outward good things that might make a nation happy and flourishing, they with great ingratitude made so ill use of them; or, without looking back to those words they will shew Israels great in∣gratitude to God, and how ill they deserved to have his blessings continued to them, but were worthy of those heavy judgments, for the future denounced to them, or which al∣ready began to seise on them. To such pur∣pose do Cyril, and Theophylact, and Jerome also expound the words, and l 1.11 and some looke on its being called (in such rendrings as so read) vitis frondosa, a vine abounding with leaves, not as being a commendation of it for ftuitfulness, but as a discommendation as m 1.12 running out into leaves, and spending its sap in them, so far as that its fruit should be little better than leaves, not good to eat or be put to other use, however the notion of abun∣dance is still retained. But others, as we said, embrace a different notion of emptiness, seem∣ing to sound clean contrary to the former: al∣though it may be considered whether both

may not concur in a more general way of em∣ptying, in as much as the sending forth in plenty, or making plentiful one thing, seems to imply an evacuation of another, or empty∣ing it self or being emptied of that of which it causeth or produceth that plenty in the other, although scarce in that sense in which some of them take it. Among these in the first place, are some of the Jewish expositors, whom many more modern do follow, though in the expounding the following words, and making out the meaning, they much differ between themselves. So Aben Ezra ex∣pounds, Gephen Bokek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 empty in which is no strength to bring forth fruit, nor is there fruit in it, and then the following words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh, lo, he expounds, He thinks that he shall produce his fruit (but) he shall be like the vine that is empty, be∣cause when I multiplied his fruit, they multiplied altars. This exposition seems obscure enough; yet Zanchi prefers it before others. Kim∣chi as to the first word, in the like manner 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an empty vine in which is no moisture; but then differently ex∣pounds the following 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Peri yesha∣veh lo, by in serting an interrogation 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. And how shall he bring forth fruit to himself, seeing he is an empty vine? for the ene∣mies have spoiled him and made him as an empty vessel; how shall he prosper any more, and in∣crease in children and wealth? Then the other words will in this way also follow as a cause why it is, or shall be so with them, because according to the multitude of his fruit, i. e. be∣cause when I multiplied his fruit and caused him to prosper in wealth and children, he multi∣plied altars to Baal. Abarbinel likewise ex∣pounds that first word in the same way that he doth, that it signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 empty, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 without strength and without moi∣sture, but in the other word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which he rendreth shall put, or bring forth, differeth, though rendring it likewise interrogatively 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and how shall it be possible, that fruit should be profitable or good to him, seeing as his sons and daughters multiplyed, he multiplyed al∣tars to idols, teaching his children to commit ido∣latry at the altars of the calves? and this he makes as a judgement denounced against them, for n 1.13 spiritual fornication, as the for∣mer words in the last c. viz. They shall bear no fruit, &c. v. 16. for corporal, their wicked∣ness in both kinds deserving a like punishment. Another exposition also he gives to this pur∣pose, The fruit is good or bad according to the tree which brings it forth, and so shall the chil∣dren (among them) be like the fathers; and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek here, he saith is in that notion according to which it is said (Nahum 2.10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bukah umebukah) where ours render it, She is empty and void, and he there explains it, void and destitute of wealth.

As to the same (viz. the meaning of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek) do Abuwalid, and R. Tanchum, say much the like, R. Tanchum explaining it in Arabick by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cor∣rupt, wast, unmanured, (or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in which is no good) barren, empty, according to the signification it hath Isa. 24.3. and Nah. 2.2. but then as to the following word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh, he makes it to be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshave, with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a and expounds it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whose fruit shall lie, i. e. fail from, or, in her, in the same sense that is before said, v. 2. the new wine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall lie, i. e. fail in her, which I suppose he took from q 1.14 Abuwalid, who gives the same interpretation, and saith he was the first that gave it, and shewing that he did on good consideration do it, saith that it cannot be convenient to render it otherwise than in this signification, and it being so ren∣dred, saith it will have a good connexion with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gephen Bokek, an empty vine; and withall that so in the following words there is given a cause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of their being frustrated of what pro∣visions (or fruits) they might expect to have, in his saying, according to the multitude of his fruit, he hath increased altars; and he thinks this interpretation of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yesha∣veh, to be confirmed in what is again and a∣gain spoken in this prophecy to the same pur∣pose, as c. 8.7. They shall sow, (or have sown) the wind, and 9.2. The floor and the wine∣press shall not feed them, and the new wine shall fail in her, and v. 16. Ephraim is smitten. He saith also that what some would have it to sig∣nifie, as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 maketh, or bring∣eth forth, is not to the purpose. The mean∣ing which he saith they then give, is that Israel was at first an empty vine, but when he came to bring forth much fruit, he made use of it for multiplying altars, which is, saith he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a slender mean∣ing and weak interpretation. Yet doth Kimchi (as we have seen) take and seem to prefer that signification of the word yeshaveh; for though he were aware of that other which Abuwalid gives of it, and saith that some so interpret it, yet he puts this of putting, giving, or bringing forth, in the first place as his own, but with another meaning of his own too, namely o 1.15 p 1.16

that which we have before put, (different from what Abuwalid saith others make) by reading it interrogatively, can he, (or how should he) bring forth fruit? for there is no need of adding, to himself, as if any thing more were by it signified, when we say, ponit sibi fructum? which makes the same sense with what Abuwalid would have, without making any alteration in the word, as if it were writ∣ten otherwise than usually with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 h for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a, and the next words will then follow as a rea∣son (as Abuwalid also would have it) why by Gods judgement they should be brought to that poor condition, viz. because when they had abundance they so vainly and wickedly abused it to Gods dishonour, in the worship of Idols. The MS. Arabick renders as R. Tanchum, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek, by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which as we have seen may well be rendred fruitless, wast, or unprofitable; but then the other word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh, he renders by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(as the vulgar Latin doth) is equal or like to it. We may likewise well enough add to these R. Solomo Jarchi, who thus ex∣plains it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Israel are like a vine that casteth her good fruit (or all whose good fruit falleth off) so they (or as the MS. because they) have forsaken me who am fruit good and profi∣table, or convenient to him. And then by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Peri yeshaveh lo, he again saith to be meant fruit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which shall profit and do good to him. Another way of exposition he also gives, thus, Israel is a spoiled (or robbed vine) the fruit of his works 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath caused (or produced) to him. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. which Mercer renders, looking on it (I think) as a distinct clause, Prodest ei ut sit vacua, quia fecerunt altaria & profuerunt congregationi suae in malum, It is profitable to them to be empty, be∣cause they made altars, and they were helpful to their congregation to evil. Which seems very r 1.17 ob∣scure, perhaps it would be plainer to take it in a continued sense thus, hath caused to him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(i. e.) Fruit that helps forward to (or promotes their being empty) because they have made altars, and they promoted or put forward their congregation (or their congregating them∣selves) for evil: and this he saith, is that which the Targum or Chaldee Paraphrast saith. By viewing which therefore, his obscure mean∣ing will be better guessed at, but the view of that I shall defer till I have set down some other rendrings, for some reason which will then appear, mean while we may observe that these Jews all agree in making 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek, empty, to be an epither to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vine, and all of them (except perhaps R. Solomo) take it to be (as Abuwalid s 1.18 warns to take it) for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or intransitive, that shews how it is in it self, not what it causeth to any other.

Having thus seen what the Jews think, we shall yet among modern interpreters find more variety. And first in this, that there are some who taking exceptions against that way which those that we have hitherto seen take, in making 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek to be an epithet to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gephen a vine, because this Nown, they think is alwayes of the Feminine gender, whereas Bokek is in the Masculine; again in that they render Bokek intransitively, where∣as elsewhere, where it occurrs in Scripture it is used transitively, to empty. They there∣fore make it as an epither agreeing with Isra∣el, and t 1.19 so render it as joyned with what fol∣lows, Vitem evacuat Israel, fructum ei poneb••t Deus, Israel emptieth the vine, God did give him fruit, according to the multitude of his fruit he hath multiplied altars, so making the state of the Common-wealth of Israel to be likened to a vine planted by God; and shew∣ing that they themselves corrupted their state, and so (as it were) emptied that vine. God indeed gave them fruit of that vine, i. e. blessed their Common-wealth abundantly, but the more they were blessed, the more altars did they build to Idols. Cocceius commend∣eth the way of de Dieu in making 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to sig∣nify transitively, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be the Feminine gender, and to be governed of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and so far agrees with him as to the construction, but then differs in the meaning, rendring, Vitem ablaqueavit Israelem, fructum ponit ipsi, He (i. e.) God mentioned in the last v. of the foregoing c. hath dugg about the vine Israel, he maketh him fruitful, i. e. he hath laid open the root and purged it from the unprofitable sprouts, and thinks the word is used in the same sense elsewhere. u 1.20 Another, following the same way of construction, Israel emptieth the vine, it laies up its fruit to it self, viz. not using it to Gods glory, but to his own Idolatrous uses. w 1.21 Others not taking exceptions against the Gender of Gephen, yet do it as to the form or signification of Bokek, and render Vitis evacuans fructum quem ponit ei, Israel is a vine Which emptieth the fruit which He (i. e. Deus God) giveth him. Without supplying God, it might in the same way be rendred, emprying the fruit which it bringeth forth. x 1.22 Others in∣verting that constr••ction, the vine emptieth Is∣rael, viz. makes him good for nothing, vacuum & amentem, as it is said c. 4.11. Wine and new wine take away the heart.

But the exceptions by these made are not of great validity; for, that the Nown 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ge∣phen, vine, y 1.23 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is as well masculine as feminine, is not only affirmed by the Jewish Lexicographers, but manifestly proved by another example out of Ezek. 17.6. where Affixes of both genders are attributed to it, and why the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bakak may not be as well here intransitive as transitive elsewhere, seeing there are many other Verbs confessedly so, and used either way, there is no reason to say, at least it will be made up by z 1.24 understan∣ding se, it self, and so made empty as forced to give a great summ of money to Pul 2 Kin. 15.20. say a 1.25 some, though I know not how ap∣positely it may be here applied or restrained to that particular story; other many wayes there were by which they were emptied and spoiled of their fruits. Others therefore not∣withstanding them, keep as to the constructi∣on, with the ancient Interpreters and Jewish Doctors which we have seen, though in other things differing from them and among them∣selves, as to the meaning. As for the first words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gephen Bokek, though in different terms, b 1.26 as vitis vacua, c 1.27 inanis void, d 1.28 spoiliata spoiled, e 1.29 inutilis unprofitable, or the like, they all give but to understand the same thing, an empty (or emptied) vine; but in the next words they do not so far agree, while some render f 1.30 fructum aestimaverit ei quispiam? should any think it can have fruit? g 1.31 Others, fructus aequabitur (or aequalis, or similis est ei) that is, the fruit shall be equal (or is equal or like) to it: others render it by ponit or ponet, and that some take in an improper sense for imponere, to imp••se upon or deceive. So Schindler imponet illi, fallet spem ipsius, shall impose upon him, shall deceive his hope. h 1.32 Others in a more proper sense of putting or bringing forth, and some of them ponit, doth, some ponet, shall bring forth, and some with an interrogation, doth or shall (or i 1.33 should) it bring forth? Others without an interrogation it k 1.34 doth, or l 1.35 shall. Calvin takes notice that some render, fructum sibi aequabit, vel fructus aequatus fuit ipsi, It shall equal its fruit to himself, which he looks on as not making a clear sense: he takes notice like∣wise that it is by some rendred, shall lie to, or deceive, which he saith would make a pro∣bable sense, Israel being as a spoiled, or robbed vine. * 1.36 It is not likely the enemies that so spoiled them would leave them any hope of fruit; but, for all that, he preferreth the plain notion of ponere, to bring forth, which then be∣ing read with an interrogation would sound, shall it bring forth fruit for it self? But he thinks it better to read it affirmatively, shall bring forth, and the sense to be, that Israel should bring forth fruit after it hath been robbed and emptied, impoverished and afflicted, by Gods many chastisements and judgements, which for reducing them to his obedience, if they had been corrigible, he sent upon them, that he might not be forced utterly to destroy them, and that after such judgments Israel had formerly by Gods mercy and blessing re∣covered like a Vine, which being emptied of its grapes one year, yet doth another year bring forth more, but to what purpose was this? For when they again were prospered ac∣cording to, &c. To this purpose he, and in this notion the Translators of the Geneva Bible seem wholly to follow him, while they render, Israel is an empty vine, yet hath it brought forth fruit unto it self, and according to the multitude thereof he hath increased the altars, &c. and thus explain their meaning in a marginal note, (an empty vine) where∣of though the grapes were gathered, yet ever as it gathered new strength, it increased new wickedness; so that the correction which should have brought them to obedience, did but utter their stubbornness.

The reverend Diodati explains it much to the same purpose; Israel hath been a vine spoiled (or made waste) yet for all that hath again brought forth fruit, according to the a∣bundance of his fruit, &c. As if God said, m 1.37 af∣ter they have been robbed (or made desolate) or preyed upon by their enemies, or spoiled of my favour, and brought as it were to a desert: I have again restored them in part and made him to prosper, but the more I blessed him, the more Idolatrous he became.

But our latter and more approved and now generally, and deservedly, followed En∣glish, restrains us not to this sense, but very literally according to the signification of the words which the Translatours took, render it (in the Text) Israel is an empty vine, he bring∣eth forth fruit unto himself, though something differently in the margin, literally also with∣out supply or alteration, according to a diffe∣rent acception of one of the words; of both it will concern us to take notice in respect to their deliberate choice, and authority in re∣commending them to us. And first as to that in the body of the Text, that we may have a conve∣nient meaning of it, it will be convenient that we make it appear not obnoxious to that ob∣jection which n 1.38 some make, viz. that it seems at the same time to make Israel like to an em∣pty

vine that hath no fruit, and to a vine that hath fruit, which is inconsistent. We there∣fore need not so understand it as if it positive∣ly affirmed those contrary conditions to be in Israel at the same time, but by saying Israel is an empty vine, and he bringeth forth fruit to him∣self, not that Israel was really empty, or spoil∣ed of all good things in which he might glory, as wealth or the like, but that it was as bad with him as if he were so, in regard that what he had he made not use of as he ought, for Gods glory, or any good uses, but squan∣dered it away to Gods dishonour in his own inventions, and idolatrous wayes, and served only himself with it, and so by bringeth forth to it self, will be meant, putteth his fruit to his own use, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 point sibi, will well bear it, which seems the intent of Junius his Note, who rendring the Text much as ours do, Vitis vacua est Israel, fructum reponit sibi, se∣cundum multitudinem fructus sui, &c. glosses it by, nemini est fructuosa; si quid profert, eo toto in libidinem suam abutitur, &c. A vine which is fruitful to none; if he bring forth any thing, he abuseth it all to his own lust, as in the follow∣ing words is declared. Or else if we under∣stand the Present tense for the Future, is, for shall be, to shew the certainty of what shall speedily befall them, (of which use of speak∣ing we have before had examples) o 1.39 then may it be understood, Israel shall be brought to that pass that he shall be as an empty Vine, be∣cause now that he hath abundance of fruit he maketh use of it for himself, only to those bad ends which follow. And (by the way) seeing some take liberty of putting in an interrogati∣on, if we should so do in this way of rendring, putting one after Is Israel an empty vine? which hath the force of a negative, then would the following words be a reply, No; for he bring∣eth forth (or hath fruit) but to himself, and for ill purposes, makes use of it, which would be all one in sense with what the LXX. (as we have seen) have. Or what if it be, according to that in our Text, thus understood, That Israel is an empty vine, it did bring forth fruit, i. e. formerly did abound in plenty of all good things, but is now emptied of them: and then the next words are a reason why by Gods just judgments she is, i. e. shall be de∣prived of them. As for the marginal reading in our Translation, wherein 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bokek is taken Transitively, Israel is a vine emptying the fruit which it gives, it gives a clear sense and plain connexion with the following words, which shew us what to understand by their fruit, to wit, that abundance which by Gods blessing they enjoyed, and how they emptied it, and made it no way profitable but hurt∣ful to themselves, so that they had even bet∣ter been without it. These our learned tran∣slatours, by their putting both these wayes and so not determining which we should take, together with the several different judgments of others of good account, which we have seen, seem to leave us in like condition to one who being in a place where many wayes open themselves to him, is in doubt which of them to take, that he may come whither he would go. But the best is, that all these (whichso∣ever a man shall take of them) concurr at the last in one, tending to the same scope, which is to describe the ill condition that Isra∣el was then in, and should certainly and sure∣ly, by Gods just judgement, be in, by rea∣son of their great abuse of his benefits which he had bestowed on them, and their imploy∣ing them to idolatrous uses, most contrary to that end for which he had given them to them.

For understanding of these several exposi∣tions aright, it will be to be considered what is meant by that fruit which Israel is, accor∣ding to some, said to be empty of, by others to have, whether of inward graces and spiri∣tual good things and works of piety, or else, of the good things of this life, wherein they might seem to glory, as abundance of wealth, multitude of men, fruitfulness in children, or any thing belonging to outward prosperity? There are among the interpretations that we have seen, some which rather seem to under∣stand them of spiritual good things and gra∣ces; but the learned Rivet cautions against those Qui vacuitatem vitis & fructus quos po∣nit sibi, referunt ad sterilitatem bonorum ope∣rum, who refer their emptiness of fruit, to their barrenness in good works: and seeing in the following words that according to the multitude of his fruit he increased altars, fruit is by the common consent of all understood of abundance of temporal good things which they of old enjoyed by Gods blessing, thinks it ought so in these first also to be taken and and must necessarily be so, except in one and the same verse it should be taken in different senses, which would make the construction very hard, and as he thinks very unlikely, yet in their doing so as they did, and by their abuse of those outward good things, can we not but be put in mind of their want of grace and religion which was the cause of their do∣ing so.

In the latter words of this verse there is no∣thing difficult either to the words or meaning: for though the ancient Interpreters different∣ly render some of the words as the LXX. rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, p 1.40

according to the multitude of her (or his) fruits he hath multiplied altars, according to the good things of his land he hath built statues, whom the printed Arabick exactly follows, whereas the MS. Arabick hath, according to the good∣ness of his land, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they have made good (or fair) altars, more literally an∣swering to the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which some li∣terally render by q 1.41 benefecerunt, some by a made word r 1.42 bonificaverunt, and the Syriack only by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 have s 1.43 built altars, and the Latin as to the latter clause, Juxta ube∣rtatem terrae exuberavit simulachris, According to the plenty of his land he abounded in idols, (as the Doway English hath, and several modern translatours either more or less literally, accor∣ding as they thought, laboured to express the meaning of that word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Hetibu, which none I think more appositely do here than our English do, They have made t 1.44 goodly images; yet do all concur in this that it is a describing of the profuseness of Israel, in lavishing their wealth in making and adorning Idols and ser∣ving them, according to what they are tuxed for above, Chap. 2 and 8. and 8.4. And there is nothing that gives occasion of suspicion but that they read all the words as we now have it in the Hebrew. Yet doth Capellus from the Chaldee take occasion of conjectu∣ring a various reading in this verse, to wit, of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yeshaveh, and saith that sure the author of that Paraphrast read instead of it, in the copy that he followed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ••ishbeh, seeing he paraphraseth the Verse thus, Israel is a wasted or spoiled vine, who was a well planted vine, while he observed the Law, the fruits of his works 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 have caus∣ed (or been a cause) to them that they should go into captivity; when I multiplyed to them plenty, they multiplyed service to their altars, when I brought (or gave) good to their land, they did good to (or beautifyed or adorned) statues or ima∣ges. Now, saith he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies, To be led into captivity, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and therefore saith he, he read not that, but this, (as if he would have the Hebrew sound, his fruit lead∣eth him into captivity.) But Buxtorf thinks, and any man which considers the Paraphrasts words may well think, that he neither read, not intended so, for plainly it appears that he rendred the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 geramu, have caused, as appears by what we have said to be R. Solomo's judgment, which well agrees with the notion of ponere, to put, which may be understood for, to cause, or produce, which we have seen many to look on as the proper signification of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshaveh. And that what he adds after fruit (viz.) of their works, and after, have caused, (viz.) that they should be carried captives, he puts in by way of paraphrastical liberty, to express what fruit he thought to be meant, and what that was of which they were cause to them. We have been forced to be long on this v. through the many different opinions of Interpreters and Expositors, more yet different perhaps may the Reader meet with, but they will, I suppose, be reduced to some of these already mentioned, and I have been already too tedious.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Nic. Fuller in cap. conc.
• b 1.2

  Chr. à Castr.
• c 1.3

  Though these significations in some forms of speech are the same, good and well, being used as well for denoting quantity as quality; so we say, a good deal or quantity, for a great deal.
• d 1.4

  Stephanus in his Index to his Thes.
• e 1.5

  Ribera.
• f 1.6

  Ribera.
• g 1.7

  Qualis vitis, taiis fructus, Merc.
• h 1.8

  Jau••ari,
• i 1.9

  Kamus.
• k 1.10

  Rivet.
• l 1.11

  Petr. à Fig.
• m 1.12

  Like that fig tree having leaves but no fruit, which our Saviour cursed, Matt. 11.13.
• n 1.13

  In this Montanus follows him.
• q 1.14

  In his Dictionary in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and this signification Oecolamp. takes.
• o 1.15

  In Kamus. spoken of a man.
• p 1.16

  Rapheleng. out of a Glossary.
• r 1.17

  Zanchi at large endeavours to make it plain if it would be.
• s 1.18

  In the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so Kimc••i in Rad.
• t 1.19

  Schindl. Lexi. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ••de Dieu, and see Rivet.
• u 1.20

  Tarnov.
• w 1.21

  Drus.
• x 1.22

  Id. see Poole.
• y 1.23

  Abuwalid. L. Rad.
• z 1.24

  As Rivet observes some to do.
• a 1.25

  Pisc. and Dutch notes.
• b 1.26

  Pag. &c.
• c 1.27

  Munst.
• d 1.28

  Calv.
• e 1.29

  Ca••.
• f 1.30

  Tig. in some copies without an interrogation, in others with it.
• g 1.31

  Zanchi, and see Mercer and Riv.
• h 1.32

  P••g. Munst
• i 1.33

  Trem. fructumne ponat sibi, and Vat.
• k 1.34

  Munst.
• l 1.35

  Pag.
• * 1.36

  Oecol.
• m 1.37

  One Italick edition in 4to. hath spogliata, another in Folio diserta, and the other words much differ in them, though to the same sense, I put both together in the note,
• n 1.38

  Rivet.
• o 1.39

  So Grot. ta••es it as a denuntiation, fore ut terra Israelis sit cultoribus vacua, that their land shall be destitute of such as should cultivate it, as Isa, 6.11.12.
• p 1.40

  Other copies have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• q 1.41

  Pag. Tig.
• r 1.42

  Pare. and see Rivet.
• s 1.43

  Agreeably R. Sal. saith the meaning of Hetibu to be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they have multiplied altars.
• t 1.44

  The Geneva fair.