A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

V. 2. As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burnt incense to graven images.

As they called them, so they went from them &c.] The person, or persons, of whom and to whom God speaketh by the Prophet, is, or are, in the preceeding verse, as we have observed, represented as one body, in the singular number, a child, and my son; in this verse in the plural, as more or many, them or they: which observed will be of that use which we have shewed, to prevent two obje∣ctions in two different wayes. First, that Israel being a whole people, a multitude, could not be a type of him that is singly one, viz. of Christ, as most do make them to be. For though they were many different persons, yet when represented as one collective body, and so looked on as but one, they might pro∣perly be so; though when spoken of as more, as in this verse, it would not be so proper to call them so. Secondly, that which is obje∣cted, that in this verse the same being spoken of which was in that, (if Israel be taken in that verse to be spoken of) and here taxed for rebellious behaviour against God, the words there cannot be referred at all to Christ, except he be also (which cannot be without blasphemy against him said, & never can there∣fore by Christians be granted) accused of disobedience to God. But the change of the stile and number in this verse from what was in that, plainly argues that they, though the same persons, are in this and that verse spoken of in different respects, and therefore, though by what is said there of their being called out of Egypt, Christ's calling thence might be prefigured, and in that respect they might be a type of him, yet it doth not follow that in respect of their disobedience here mentioned, they should be so too, or he should resemble them in that regard also. To pass on there∣fore from those words, so only at present taken, as, according to the last way of expo∣sition mentioned, they concern Israel as a type of another, to these in which they alone are manifestly and wholly concerned; we have in both of them the calling of them mentioned, but by several calls; that in the first verse, that whereby they were called out of Egypt, those in this verse, such whereby

they were at sundry times called after their coming out thence upon that call. In that verse God, though by Moses he called them, attributes the calling to himself, without mentioning his Messenger, and I called them: in this, though it were still he that called them, (which consideration, I suppose, made the LXX. here also to render it in the first per∣son as I called them) he speaks not of him∣self, but of his Messengers, they called them. Who they were is not by name expressed, but manifestly understood of such as he sent, who were at first, Moses, and afterwards, all his Prophets and Messengers, by whom he called them to himself, and to obedience to him, his laws and worship, from that time that he first called them, to the time in which our Prophet spake, and called them. This some think so plain, that in their translation of the words they boldly supply Prophetae, the Prophets; so Tremel. rendring, quo magis Pro∣phetae clamarunt ad eos, eo longius abierunt à conspectu eorum, by how much the more the Pro∣phets called unto them, by so much the farther they went away from them, agreeable to the Chaldee, I sent my Prophets to teach them. Ours leaving the express mention of who those that called them were, supply only as, as the LXX 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and others the like, prout a 1.1 revocant eos, as they call them back. And in these words, as they called them, as is we say a supply; for in the Hebrew is only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 kareu lahem cen halecu mippenehem, they called them, so they went from them; but the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cen, so, seems to require a note of similitude (as, or the like) before it.

To avoid any supply of that b 1.2 some would have the words read by way of interrogation, did they call them? others think it not neces∣sary to express either any supply, or note of interrogation, but plainly render, vocave∣runt eos, sic abierunt &c. they called them, so they departed &c. as the vulgar Latin, and c 1.3 others to the same purpose, clamaverunt ad eos, sic &c. The sense will still be the same, and the Reader will supply to himself, either somthing signifying as, or an interrogation, as he thinks plainest to his understanding.

They, e. i. the Prophets & Messengers of God, in all ages, as we said, called them. Whom? or when? neither is expressed, the word being indennitely put, without expressing by name, either persons or time, as neither, they that before he saith called, were particularly ex∣pressed. As for the persons denoted by, them, who they were, we are given to understand from the former verse, in which Israel is named. The same then is here meant by the relative, them, although here be in the plural what was there in the singular number, as a d 1.4 people being a collective body is usually (as we have before elsewhere seen) indif∣ferently put either in the one or the other, as looked on as one or more: the singular number doth better fit with the design of that verse, the plural with the design of this. The name Israel is common to that people in their several ages, e 1.5 people & states having, as well as men, their ages. They were in that verse spoken of as then in their childhood (when Israel was a child) but when it was spoken by the Prophet, having past over both that, and their youthfull age, were in their old age, a fading decaying condition, as by the history of them in the Scripture, as well as by what is spoken of them by our Prophet, shewing them to be neer to destruction, appears. Though therefore those words are expresly limited to that first age of theirs, these being indefinitely put, may agree to any other age of theirs, so that both the persons spoken of, and the sins for which they are taxed, may be well thought f 1.6 not to belong only to those of one age, but of more. And indeed if we look into the history of them & their behaviour, we shall find them in every age of theirs after that first, guilty of what they are now accused of, disobe∣dience to the call of God and his Prophets. His call of them out of Egypt, when Israel was a child, they did obey, g 1.7 though not without murmuring; but what call of his did they ever after hearken to? We hear his complaint of them, even as soon as upon his call they had departed out of that, all the time of their being in the wilderness, that they tempted him, and proved him, and saw his works, so that fourty years long he was grieved with that generation, and said, it is a people that do erre in their heart, and they have not known my ways, Ps. 95.9, 10. &c. Hebr. 3.9.10. This they did while they had yet h 1.8 Moses among them, by whom God called them out of Egypt; even then they made them a golden calf, and committed whoredom with the daughters of Moab, and joyned themselves unto Baal-Peor, Numb. 25.1. &c. not to re∣cite their often murmurings and rebel∣lions in the Law mentioned: much more in after years under their Judges and Kings, was Israel prone to Idolatry and rebellion, while they were one people with Judah, and had first the tabernacle and then the temple among them: much more yet after they for∣sook the temple, and were a distinct people

from Judah, as they were in this our Pro∣phet's time. So that the Israel, and the sins of all these times, may the words, so put as they are, be referred to; so that we may ob∣serve not only, that by the Prophet's thus speaking to them when he did, it is manifest that they did concern the Israel of that pre∣sent time, but that the sins of former times also are charged now on them continuing in them, and they threatned to be punished for them; so that they shall suffer as well be∣cause their fathers hearkened not when God by his Messengers called them, as because they themselves now did in the like manner, which is according to what our Saviour threatens to the children of those that slew the Prophets, Matt. 23.31,-35. viz. That because they continued still to crucify and persecute those that God sent unto them, therefore upon them should come all the righteous bloud shed upon the earth, from the bloud of righteous Abel, unto the bloud of Zacharias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar. So do God's words and method of proceeding here suggest to us to inferre, that on the Israelites of that generation, the Idolatrous off-spring of Idolatrous fathers, should be infflicted the punishment due for all the Idolatries of those their forefathers, from their coming out of Egypt, to that very time.

How the sins of the fathers may concern their posterity, and for what reason they be liable to the punishment of them, hath been already said, what may suffice, on c. 9. v. 10. p. 469. If the children will not be intangled in the judgments due to their fathers sins, nor have them imputed to them, they seeing their fathers sins which they have done, must consider them, and not do the like, (Ezek. 18.14.) but if they seeing them, and hearing what judgments God hath denounced there∣fore against them, shall yet not lay it to heart, but boldly continue to do the like, what is this but a filling up of the measure of their fathers, (Matt. 23.32.) from which being not cleansed to that day, the punishment thereof should now come upon them, (there v. 36.) So was the case with the present ge∣neration of Israel.

The crimes objected against them in such words, as comprehend both their fathers wickedness and theirs, are, that as God's Prophets and Messengers called them, so they went from them. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cen ha∣lecu mippenehem, sic abierunt à faciebus (vel i 1.9 facie) corum, so they went away (or de∣parted) from their faces (or face.) So; That is an usual signification of the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cen, and by their going away from their face, is usually understood that they refused to hearken to them, but turned their backs to (them, according to that expression Jer. 2.27.) k 1.10 which is a token of contempt. So, i. e. when, whensoever, or l 1.11 as oft as, or as much as they called them, or m 1.12 the more they called them, the more did they turn from them, or from what they called them to. It was a very great mercy in God not to leave them to themselves without admonition, that so left they might run on to their destruction, but sent still n 1.13 such as, whenever they went out of the right way; should admonish them, and call on them to return to it; so that their eyes should see their teachers, and their ears should continually hear a word behind them, saying, this is the way, walk in it, when they turned to the right hand, and when they turned to the left, as he speaks, Isaiah 30.20, 21. For them to turn away their eyes from such Teachers, to stop their ears against that word, must certainly be great ingratitude in them to God; yet such are these Israelites here taxed as guilty of, in that as they whom God sent to perform this good office to them, did call on them, so they went from them.

So; so do both ours and others render: but the word besides that signification of so, hath also the signification of right, or direct, and that the Jewish Author of the MS. Arab. here takes, rendring the verse thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to give the words in that character as they are written; They called them, right (or directly) they went from before them, that they might sacrifice to Idols, and burn incense to carved images. The meaning will be still much the same, except we may say that the word so, expresseth neglect, disregard and contempt; and the word right, more of contradiction and stub∣borness, that they did not only neglect or refuse to hearken to them, but went from them, or another way, even while they were present and looked on them, (as we may think the word, from their face, to include) and set themselves in direct opposition, or to do right contrary, to what they called on them to do. Both are aggravated by what is ex∣pressed in the following words, they sacrificed to Baalim &c. they did not only neglect to turn unto God, o 1.14 but in opposition to him set themselves to worship things contrary to him, abominable Idols, and to sacrifice to them. Whether we take the word Baalim, being in the plural number, Baals, for more of their chief Idols which under that name they wor∣shipped,

or more statues of one so called by them, or one eminent one, by way of emi∣nency and honor having that title given him, in imitation perhaps of what they saw the one true God to be called, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Elohim, in the plural number, to denote his great ex∣cellency, as God of gods, or the only true God, to whom that name did properly be∣long, it will not much import to enquire. Enough it will be that thereby is meant an Idol or Idols, and that they are accused for forsaking the ways of God, and giving them∣selves up to Idolatry, in the several ways thereof which are expressed by their sacri∣ficing (according to the manner of outward worship in those days) to Baalim, and their burning incense to graven images.

How early they began thus to neglect, and go contrary to the call of God and his Mes∣sengers, appears by their setting up to them∣selves the golden calf, and their joyning them∣selves to Baal-Peor, even while they had Moses with them. How in succeeding ages they stubbornly continued so to do, and espe∣cially after their defection and parting from the Kingdom of Judah, is likewise manifest by Jeroboam's setting up the two calves, by which he made Israel all along after to sin, and Ahab's bringing in among them the wor∣ship of Baal 1 Kings 16.31, 32, 33. whom how they afterwards followed, appears by what is said of them 2 Kings 17. from v. 7. to the end of the 16. and how highly guilty the present generation here spoken to was in that kind, by our Prophet's so often accusing them of it, by which means we have had oc∣casion already to speak of the name Baalim, and its singular Baal, what may suffice, as on c. 2.8. and likewise of the expression of burning incense to graven images see on c. 2.13.

This explication of this verse which we have given, seems plain, and is by most fol∣lowed, I think deservedly; yet are there others who give another much different, not understanding, they called them, of God's Mes∣sengers, but others which I shall only give in their own words, as preferring this: so Aben Ezra, The meaning is, out of Egypt I called my son to serve me, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but they now have called to them, (viz.) to Baa∣lim, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and as they called to them, (viz. to Baalim;) so they went away, and departed from their land before (or for, or by reason of) them: and there are (saith he) that expound, my Prophets called them, but they went 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 backward from them. Abarbinel also takes the same way of expounding the words, and rejecting the exposition of R. Solomon, which is as he explains it, that God's Prophets called them, i. e. Israel, early and late to turn unto God, and that as those called them, so they went from them, to sacrifice to Baalim and to burn incense to graven images: because the name of Prophets is not expressed in the text, he thinks it more convenient to interpret, they called them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. To what con∣cerns the calves, often mentioned, as if he said, I called them out of Egypt to serve me, and they called them, i. e. the Baalim (or they called to them, i. e. to Baalim) to serve them, and as they called them, so they went away and departed from their land before them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that they might sacrifice to Baalim &c. These their words want not obscurity, as in the con∣struction of Baalim, mentioned in the latter clause by putting it in the first, so as to what they mean, p 1.15 by their saying they went out of their land to serve them; yet doth Monta∣nus also among Christians follow the same way of construction, and gives his meaning to the same purpose, making by them, in they called them, to be referred to Baalim. I called them, but they called not me, but those gods that they might serve them, yet from whom they had departed, or been drawn away by me; but from whom forsooth they had only so departed as that they did not only call them, but sacrificed to Baalim, and burnt incense to graven images, that so by the sweet savour thereof they might make them favourable to them. This exposi∣tion of his q 1.16 a learned Commentator reciting, gives thus his censure, Prior tamen intelli∣genti a uti communior, sic & verior, but the first meaning (viz. that which we gave in the first place) is, as the more common, so the truer; which censure I think well agrees to that of Aben Ezra and Abarbinel also.

There is in the LXX a seeming difference from what we read in this verse, as in re∣gard to their putting the verb first in the singular number, I called them, instead of, they called them; so in that they part the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mippenehem, which we read, from their face, or from them, into two, the first of which they joyn with the preceding words, and the second with the latter, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. They went away from my face, they sacrificed to Baalim, which gives a plain and easy sense, but such as som∣thing differs from the reading in the original, and is no necessary argument to us to leave

that. The printed Arab. wholly agrees with them, the Syriac also, in putting r 1.17 from be∣fore me, but not in the rest.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Jun. Trem.
• b 1.2

  L. de Dieu.
• c 1.3

  Tig. Pagn.
• d 1.4

  Petr. à Fig.
• e 1.5

  Siquidem ut homines, ita etiam respublicae suas aetates habent, Drus.
• f 1.6

  Diversorum temporum peccata uno sermone Propheta complectitur, Chr. à Castr.
• g 1.7

  Jerom. Petr. à Fig.
• h 1.8

  Deutr. 31.27.-29.
• i 1.9

  As the Vulg. Lat.
• k 1.10

  Rivet.
• l 1.11

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Sal. Kim.
• m 1.12

  Drus. Riv.
• n 1.13

  Which the plural number of the verb seems here to import. See Trem. vocarunt, suppresso nominativo, perinde ac si diceret nullum inter ipsos caruisse monitore.
• o 1.14

  As some also instead of sic, so, render sed, but: see Rivet.
• p 1.15

  Except they should respect their going into captivity out of their own land for their Idolatry, or per∣haps in this way mippenehem might be, before them, i. e. whither they directed them, ut grex ovium ante faciem pastoris &c. Sanebig.
• q 1.16

  Chr. à Castr.
• r 1.17

  And indeed the going from them, (i. e. the Prophets) was going from him.