A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

V. 10. I will be thy king: where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities? and thy judges, of whom thou saidst, Give me a king and princes?

I will be thy king: where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities? &c. Our an∣cienter

publickly authorized English transla∣tion hath, I am: where is thy king now that should help thee in all thy cities? So also that from Geneva as to the distinction of the words, only leaving out that particle now, who for ex∣plaining their meaning give also this note, I am all one, James 1.17. Several other rendrings also of the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehi, are there from others, who take it to be a verb of the future tense from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hayah, to be, the same that fully written would be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehyeh; some joining it with the fol∣lowing word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 malceca, thy king, so to make a clause with it, as ours do; or else to be a distinct clause by it self, and that other word to be referred to what follows it. Cal∣vin so taking it, as our ancienter English, di∣stinguisheth it from the following words thus, Ero: Rex tuus ubi? &c. explaining it also by, Maneo semper idem, & constanter paratus sum me ostendere beneficum erga homines, I remain always the same, and am constantly ready to shew my self beneficial to men, referring to the same place of James 1.17. Pagnin in that way also, for explication sake, puts in the text it self, Ero in perpetuum, I will be for ever, sed rex tuus nunc servet te, but let thy king now save thee; which is much the same with Kimchies explication, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 k 1.1 I will be firm for ever, but thy king where is he? &c. In the same manner seems R. Salomo also to distinguish the words ex∣plaining it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. I will remain, or stand, on the other side, or aloof, to see where thy king is, that I may see what will be thy latter end; where is he that shall save thee &c. l 1.2 Others rendring it so also as to signify, I will be, yet not to be joined with the following word, malceca, thy king, supply another word from the pre∣ceding verses, viz. ero, inquam, leo, I will, I say, be as a lion, as he had threatned to be to them, as a lion, a leopard, a bear.

These all take, we see, the first word for a verb; but others many, of good authority do not so, but only for a word of interroga∣tion. So the LXX 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, so the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 where is now thy king, that he may save thee? the Syriack in the like meaning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, so the Vulgar La∣tin, ubi est rex tuus? which makes some to conjecture, that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehi, they did read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eiyeh, which signifies interrogative∣ly, where? and that saith Cappellus is a better reading than we now have. But what need is there for him, or any, to say so? Why is it not sufficient rather to note hence, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehi signifies the same that elsewhere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aiyeh ordinarily doth? Sure these authorities that we have of those ancient Interpreters, may be sufficient for it of themselves. Yet may we add others of Jews, as well as Christians. Abuwalid, Ebn Jannahi that chief Gramma∣rian among the Jews, and R. Tanchum often cited, positively affirm that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ehi, whether by transposition of letters from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aiyeh, or otherwise, is the same in signification with it both here and v. 13. Amongst Christians, Drusius prefers it before any other, and thinks it confirmed by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 epo being joined to it, which is usually joined with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 aiyeh, and adds Emphasis to the in∣terrogation, making it to sound, ubi nunc? or, ubi jam? where now? Mercer is likewise for that rendring of the Ancients, and cen∣sures the rendring of it by, ero, saying of it, friget, that it is a cold interpretation. Cocceius also rendring it, ubi est rex tuus, ubinam? saith, non potest verti, cro rex tuus, that it cannot be rendred, I will be thy king, quia epo ubinam nihil sit ad rem, seeing then there would be no place for epo, now, and it would be said, I will save thee, not, let him save thee, nor would there be any good dependance or connexion of the words, and thy judges; withall the words, which are a commination, would be turned into a promise. As for that rendring of some who render, sum, rex tuus ubi? I am, where is thy king? it is, he sharply saith, phraseo∣logia insolens & inepta, an unusual and incon∣venient expression.

These authorities, I suppose, are sufficient to prove that here is no necessity of feigning a various reading, because the LXX and Vul∣gar Latin render that by where, which others render by I will be, or I am. As to the matter or passing judgment betwixt such rendrings, that way by making it a particle of interro∣gation hath, we see, as great authorities as well may be; yet Tremellius having consi∣dered it, judges it a better way, and more agreeable to the distinction of the words, which the accent in the Hebrew requires, to render, ero rex tuus, I will be thy king, and so to look on the following words as importing, where are those whom thou wilt oppose against me, that they may protect and save thee? as if he did here assert his right of dominion over the Israelites, though they had fallen off from their obedience to his law, so that he derides as well the folly, as the wickedness of their con∣fidence, in that they opposed the power of their Idols and confederates against all the threats of God; as if he should say,

Although they have cast off the yoke, although they have given themselves up to other Gods, and addicted themselves to the service of men, yet shall they know that they are under my hand and power, none shall take away the right of my

kingly power, which I acquired by re∣deeming Israel.

Capito is much of the same opinion, Because they rejected the Lord that he should not rule over them he asserts his kingdom, sum vel ero, I am, or will be, thy king; nam hujusmodi verba absolvuntur à tempore, for such words are indifferent as to any time. The same way of rendring we see that our last Translatours choose and prefer, and we may take them either in that sense mentioned, or else so as to mean, if thou wouldest return unto me, I would, or will, be thy king and savior, otherwise, where is now any other to save thee? let him appear. A different interpretation from any of these which we have seen, the MS. Arab. hath, who rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. I will be thy king, here, that he may help thee in all thy cities, or countries, and where are thy judges of which thou saidst 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 set over me, or I will set over me, a king and princes, thus in a note gives his m 1.3 meaning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by what he saith, I will be thy king, he means, where is he that said to thee, I will be thy king.

This great difference is here concerning the first word of this verse, that being any way setled, the scope of the following is plainer, and such as will agree with any of the mean∣ings given to that, as being to declare the helpless and perplexed condition that Israel had now brought themselves to, whether they thought still to find help from God, whom they had rebelled against and forsaken, or from any other, they were in both vain. God will not continue to help them, no other can. Both are intimated in the manner of the ex∣pression; that he will no longer help them, by his sending them to others; that others cannot, by his deriding their vain trust on them, whether it be rendred as it is by the Vulgar, Where is thy king? now especially let him save thee in all thy cities; or as by others, Where is thy king now, that he may save thee? &c. or to the like purpose; or as by ours, Where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities? the sense of all will be as we said, that he having withdrawn his help from them, as he manifestly intimates he will do, and distresses every where in all their cities having befallen them, or being like to befall them, there is no other in whom they might place their confi∣dence, whether King or n 1.4 Judges, or any Rulers or Magistrates, that under that name may be comprehended; which he describes by saying, of whom thou saidst, give me a king and princes.

Here may seem respect to be had to the Israelites asking of old a King, 1 Sam. 8.5. where the Elders of Israel being gathered to∣gether, say unto Samuel, Make us a king to judge us like all the nations, by which desire of theirs God saith, they did not reject Samuel, but him that he should not reign over them v. 7. and so bent were they on this, that though Samuel urged all arguments he could to disswade them from it, nevertheless they re∣fused to obey his voice, and said. Nay but we will have a king over us, that we also may be like other nations, and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battels, v. 19, 20. And v. 22. it is said that the Lord bad Samuel hearken unto their voice, and make them a king: and so he did, and ever after they had a king; at first one over the whole twelve tribes, and after the rent in Re∣hoboams time two, one over two tribes, an∣other over the other ten, and so was it with them at that time when this was spoken. What they expected from their king, ap∣pears from their own words, viz. that he should judge them, and go out before them, and fight their battels, which and whatsoever else they could expect from him, will be com∣prehended under the words here used of saving them in all their cities; but how vain they were in this expectation, God having withdrawn his help from them and their king, appears by putting it to the question, where is he that may save thee, either king or judges, of whom thou saidst, give me a king and princes? which question plainly includes a denial of power in any of them to do it, and is a de∣riding of the vain confidence of the people in trusting on any of them for safety. In the hi∣story above cited there is mention only of a king, not of judges and princes, which are here joined with him; but this shews that in their petition were implied princes and judges, with other like officers of state and govern∣ment, by which the kings of other nations to whom they desired to be like, did at home rule their people, and at home or abroad wage their wars: they had now all these, yet can none of them, or all together, save them. It was that which, when upon their instance God had at first granted them a king, Samuel told them, that if they would fear the Lord, & serve him, and obey his voice, and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, then should both they and their king continue following the Lord &c. 1 Sam. 12.14. but if they should

rebel against the commandment of the Lord, and do wickedly, then the hand of the Lord should be against them, and they should be con∣sumed both they and their king, v. 15, and 25. And this is the condition that now for their wickedness is like to befall them and their king, all events and success of things, which concern them both, being wholy disposed of by God, and neither by any power in their king or themselves to be hindred, which the next words give us further to consider.

Notes

• k 1.1

  So Munst. ego ero firmus.
• l 1.2

  Pare.
• m 1.3

  J. H. Urs. seems to take much the like meaning, Ero rex tuus, ille: quum jam tot annis vi & ferre intrusit, postea ut populum haberet obsequentem, nihil non molitus, pactus, pollicitus est; ubi ille? viz. their last king Hosea.
• n 1.4

  Jun. Trem. render it vindices, Pisc. per judices intelliguntur hic, ipsi reges; and see Drus.