A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

V. 3. Ashur shall not save us, we will not ride upon horses, neither will we say any more to the work of our hands, Ye are our gods: for in thee the fatherless findeth mercy.

Ashur shall not save us, we will not ride upon horses neither &c. They were before minded that they had fallen by their iniquity, and shewed that the only way for recovering themselves, was by returning unto the Lord by repentance and acknowledgment of their sins, and begging pardon of them; which having in the first place instructed them in general to sue for, for the taking away of them all as all pernicious, he here descends to a more particular designation of some, which had been mere stumbling blocks and cause of offence to them, by themselves cast in their own way▪ which they are necessarily to re∣move out of their way, that they may with ac∣ceptation be able to turn unto the Lord, and re∣cover their standing; and those are, considence in such vain things as they had sought to, and put their trust in hitherto, with neglect of God, to the deceiving themselves, and provoking of him, which they are here taugh•• to re∣nounce and disclaime, which things what they were we shall see in going over the words in order. The first thing that they are to ac∣knowledge themselves guilty in, and now re∣nounce, is confidence in the Assyrians for help and safety in these words, Asshur shall not save us. That name may be taken either for the king or people of Assyria, or rather for both. For their seeking to them, and relying on them for help, they are above in this our Prophet taxed, as c. 5. v. 13. That when Ephraim saw his sickness, he went to the Assy∣rians, and sent to king Jareb; again c. 7.11. like a silly dove without heart they called to Egypt, and went to Assyria; and c. 8. v. 9. for going up to Assyria to hire lovers; and c. 12.1. for that they made a covenant with the Assyrians.

Asshur was then it seems the most potent king and people, and such as they thought should be able to protect them against all other enemies. But how vain they were in such hope, appears by the forecited c. 5.13. yet, saith he, he could not save them. What the proud Assyrian said of the Egyptian, that he was as a staff of a broken reed, whereon if a man leane, it will go into his hand and pierce it, Isaiah 36.6. the Assyrian himself was truly to Ephraim, and did not only not support him, but was every way instrumental in casting him down, being become his greatest enemy, and his trust in him was a great cause that he is now, as it is here said, fa••len; from which fall as he will ever hope to rise, he must now cast him off, utterly disclaim all confi∣dence in him, and seek after a better help to raise him and support him; so are they taught to do and say in these words, Asshur shall not save us. Junius and Tremellius render it, non potest servare nos, cannot save us, as if they acknowledged his inability to do it.

A second thing of like folly and mischief to them are they taught to acknowledge to have been, their trust in the strength and power of horses, while they must say, we will not ride upon horses. In explaining this ex∣pression, viz. what is the fault that they are to acknowledge themselves to have been guilty of, and to profess that they will not hereafter erre or sin in the same kind, there are different ways taken. By the professing that they will not ride on horses, some take to be understood that they will no more go or send into Egypt to procure thence horses to ride on, and by them to strengthen themselves against their enemies, as trusting in them and think∣ing, that thereby the should save and se∣cure themselves. So saith R. Salomo, that by this is meant, the aid of the E••yptians, who sent horses to them. t 1.1 Aben Ezra also, we

will not rely on the Assyrians, nor on the horses which are brought out of Egypt. Thence that they were usually with horses supplied appears out of several passages in the Scripture, and that thence they did fetch them, though it might seem contrary to the command of the law, as for example Deut. 17.16. that their king should not multiply horses, nor cause the people to return into Egypt, to the end that they might multiply horses, which seems given to prevent their taking off their trust on God alone to place it on such vain things, though seeming to men of greatest use and strength for battel and for safety, for offence and defence; and their not observing this command causeth him else∣where to i••veigh against them, who thought to secure themselves by such means, wo to them that go down to Egypt for help, and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many, and in horse-men because they are very strong; but they look not unto the holy one of Israel, neither seeke the Lord, Isaiah 31.1. In this way to say, we will not ride upon horses, will be all one with, non implorabimus auxilium Aegypti, as Grotius takes it to be, u 1.2 we will not seeke for the help of Egypt, for which they are above accused in the forecited c. 7.11. they flie to Egypt, of which what the conse∣quence was likely to be, as these here by ex∣p••rience found it to be, appears likewise by the 35. of that forecited Isaiah 31. Now the Egyptians are men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirits; when the Lord shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they shall all faile together.

2. It is otherwise without particular re∣spect to Egypt expounded of horses in gene∣ral, whencesoever procured and prepared for their defence, in the strength and multitude of which, without looking to the Lord, they trusted, and together w 1.3 under that one kind named, including all other warlike prepara∣tions, by which they thought themselves suf∣ficiently fenced and fortified, without de∣pendance on God. The horse may seem in particular to be deservedly named, as among other helps in that kind of especial note, in regard of his serviceableness by reason of his great courage and strength, which is excel∣lently described in Job c. 39.19. &c and of his swiftness either for pursuit or flight, for which reasons it is peculiarly said of him, the horse is prepared against the day of battel, Prov. 21.31. which appears to have been the more peculiar use that horses were in those days among them put to, and not to such ordi∣nary use of drudgery and lower services, to which they are among us put, and by reason of their good performance in that kind, were they looked on as of such help, that men did too much trust in them for safety, ac∣cording to what is said in the forecited Isaiah c. 31.1. and Psalm 20.7: some trust in chariots, some in horses. So by these words it appears that these had formerly done, till now by sad experience they find, that a horse is a vain thing for safety, neither shall deliver any by his great strength, Psalm 33.17. and therefore in acknowledgement of their folly in it, and with sorrow for what they had done, are they now taught to say, we will not ride upon horses, viz. so as to trust for safety in them or their riders, as the Chaldee paraphraseth it. That will be the necessary meaning of the words, and that which they are to disclaim, not the riding on horses otherwise, or making law∣full use of them as instruments of service to them even in their wars while their trust was not in them, but in God.

3. There is yet another exposition of the words given likewise without respect had to Egypt, but rather still to the forementioned Assyrian, by their not riding on horses, meaning their not sending messengers on horseback (for speed sake) to implore help from the Assy∣rians. This among the Jews Kimchi gives, whose words sound, whereas we did, or were wont to, send horses to the Assyrian that he might save us, we will not do so any more. Among Christians, Calvin prefers this also as the most simple way of exposition, and will therefore have these words to be joined with the pre∣ceding, thus, Assur shall not save us, ideo non conscendemus equum, therefore will we not ride on horses, nempe ut cursitemus, to wit that we may run up and down to far places, as to Assyria to procure some to come and help us, but will stay at home expecting x 1.4 there help from the Lord. That in this kind they had been faulty, appears out of those places of this Prophet above cited, as c. 5.13. and c. 7.9. yet that this should be here particularly taxed in them, I think is not plainer than either of the other ways. Mean while, that they were in all these kinds guilty, is evident, and the words being appliable to them all, why may they not be so understood as to comprehend them all? All argued their diffidence in God, and putting trust in others, which as being great both folly and sin, folly in trusting in things not able to save, and sin in robbing God of that his honour (of which he is very jealous) of being acknowledged the only Saviour, they are, as they will find any help from him, heartily to repent of, and to disclaim: the words in which they are taught to do it, amounting to as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

as R. Tanchum explains it, we will leave off from rel••ing on such which are but creatures, we will not trust in horses, nor multitude (of forces.) And if it be folly and sin to trust in any such creatures of God, to which he hath given great strength, either in men the noblest of them on earth, and to whom he hath given dominion over the works of his hands, Psalm 8.6. or horses the most serviceable to man, and usefull and helpfull, to which he hath given strength, and clothed his neck with thunder, Job 39.21. &c. so that he mocketh at fear, and turneth not back from the sword; how much more shall it be to trust in creatures (that we may so speak) of their own framing, which are what they are only y 1.5 from them, and can neither stand nor move, but only as by them ordered and so more ignoble than the lowest of God's making, and not so much as usefull instruments for any service, either in peace or war? Should they seek for safety from such, who cannot save themselves, but by men be with more ease marred than they were made? Yet such had formerly been their folly and wickedness, as appears by their being all along in this Pro∣phet taxed for it. And now therefore are they in the nex•• place taught, as they will find acceptance with God, utterly to renounce them, and to say, Neither will we say any more to the work of our hands, ye are our gods. The words ye are, are supplied, and there being in the Hebrew nothing to express it, but barely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 elohenu, literally thus, as it is by some rendred, neither will we say any more, our gods, to the works of our hands; so that z 1.6 some render it, neither will we any more say, O our god, to the work of our hands. Castalio renders it, nec dicemus amplius, deos nostros opus nostrarum ma∣nuum; the Vulgar Latin hath, neither will we say, dii nostri opera manuum nostrarum, which the Doway render, our gods the work of our hands. Grotius thinks that for opera, was first written a 1.7 operi, to the work. The MS. Arab. much agreeably to the ordinary reading of the Latin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 neither will we ever, or at all, say, he that we serve b 1.8 is the work of our hands, or the work of our hands is he that we serve. The Syriack renders it agreeably to what ours and others have, only omitting the pronoun affixed in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 elobenu, our gods, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and we will not any more call gods the work of our hands. The LXX only put in the plural, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to the works of our hands, what is in the Hebrew in the singular, to the work. The meaning is by R. Tanchum thus given, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and we will turn from the serving of all that is not worthy, or deserves not, of it self to be served, or worshipped. Such were certainly their Images and Idols, their Calves and Baals, which they (as it is above de∣scribed) made to themselves of their silver and gold, and beautified, and forgetting the Lord, called their lovers, and said, that they gave her her bread and her water, her wool and her flaxe, her oyl and her drink, c. 2. v. 5. and ascribed all power to, which is to be ascribed to none but God. From these words c 1.9 Drusius looks upon it as manifest that the Israelites then did worship their Baals and Calves for true Gods, and that it is by some learned men rashly denied. But why they ought not so to esteem them, is as by many passages in Scri∣pture shewing the vanity of Idols, made ap∣parent, so here (that we need not look after others) by the name by which they are called, viz. the work of their own hands. And shall they look on that as of divine power, which hath no••hing but what they themselves gave it, and can as easily take away what they gave, and destroy what they made? What greater folly, as well as wickedness can there be? They are therefore taught, and deservedly required to cast away and renounce all confidence in such vain things, and to profess with sincerely pe∣nitent hearts that they will no more rely on them; and when they have done this, they that have fallen, and have need of help, and can find none among all that they formerly relied on, whom have they now to flie unto but God alone? from whom as they will ob∣tain help, they must have faith and confidence in him, as in him alone acknowledging both his power and will to do them good, and afford them help; a distrust of one or both which their former flying to those other vain things shewed, but they are taught now to acknow∣ledge both, viz. that he is the only, the all∣sufficient Savior, which in the next words they are taught to profess, saying, for in thee the fatherless findeth mercy. The words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher beca yer••cham yatom, thus rendred (which seems the plainest and most convenient way of rendring) and placed as they are after disclaiming of all other things, men or horses, or ought else, as all vain things for help and safety, as a reason of their dis∣claiming them, are a confession of their be∣lief of these things: 1. that God is all-suffi∣cient to help and save those that any ways stand in need of help: 2. that he alone is so: 3. that he will shew himself so to all, even the greatest sinners upon their conversion, that

rightly implore his help: and then a profes∣sion that they being now in such a condition as requires help, and of themselves altoge∣ther helpless, they will now, rejecting all hope and confidence in any other thing which before they vainly looked after, depend only on him, and will with unwavering faith ex∣pect help from him, and not doubt by his mercy to find it. Though the words seem only a confession of their belief of those foremen∣tioned truths, yet do they so placed as they are in that address which they are taught to make to God, necessarily include such a profession of sole dependance on him, with confidence that they shall not faile of what they may ex∣pect from him, neither through want of power or mercy in him, and therefore that they do beg of him, that he will, moved by his mercy, exert his power in helping them, pardoning and removing those their sins by which they had fallen, receive them graciously, and give them all such good things as they had need of, and that this they doubt not of finding from him, whose property it is to have mercy on the fatherless, or such as are as fatherless children, helpless. To this purpose Kimchi gives the meaning, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for we know that in thee, thee alone, the fatherless findeth, or shall find, mercy, and into him that hath no strength, thou wilt put strength, and deliver him, and so thou wilt, or shalt, do or so do thou, to, or for us; and this is noted by Aben Ezra to be put in opposition to what was before said, thou hast fallen by thine iniquity, which includes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and thou hast no helper. But here now is shewed where he shall find help to raise him up. Of this rendring and this exposition that it is agreeable to the words there is no doubt, yet do we find ancient Interpreters to differ from it in their expressions, the chief cause of which seeming to be from their dif∣ferent acception of the first word in the clause, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher, which ours render, for, it may be observed that among the different significations in which that word is used, there are these two, for, and which or who. The first of which R. Tanchum notes that it here hath, being, saith he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the signi∣fication of ci, because, or for, and in Arabick rendred 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 leanna, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 beanna, as it is in d 1.10 several other places. So it is by ours and most other modern Interpreters taken, but the LXX, according to the readings of the usual copies, takes it in the other, viz. of which, rendring as it is readd in the London Polyglot, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Latin translated, qui in te est miserebitur pupilli, as in the printed Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he that is in thee will have mercy on the fatherless. He, that is, according to Cyril, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God. In the words thus rendred there is not only a different signi∣fication of the first word, but withall a change of the order and construction of the whole clause. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 beca, in thee, is not re∣ferred as in ours and like translations to God, but to Israel; the passive verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yerucham, findeth mercy, changed into the active, sheweth mercy; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yatom, the fatherless, from the nominative case into the accusative, and all made not words by them to be spoken, but words spoken to them, not a profession from them of what they believed concerning God, but a declaration of what indeed God was, and they ought to believe of him, and so a reason why they should repent, and profess what in the foregoing words they are taught to do. So is Cyrils exposition of them, do not doubt, O Israel, saith he, that thou shalt obtain what thou desirest, if thou shalt first repent; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for God which is in thee, or among thee, knoweth how to have mercy and to shew compassion to orphans. If instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the masculine gender, we should read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the neuter from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. that which, and so render, quod in te est, that which is in thee will shew mercy to the orphan, or fatherless, the pronoun thee, would refer to God, and so come neerer to what ours follow, and be still part of that form of words prescribed to them, and it will sound, that which is in thee, i. e. thy nature and property is to have mercy on the fatherless; and so would not differ in sense from ours only in putting what, for for, and expressing the verb in the active, which the Hebrew hath in the passive, to the same purpose, he sheweth mercy to such, being the same in sense with, such find mercy from him.

This which we have mentioned is the most approved Greek reading, and that which is put in the Polyglot; but e 1.11 other copies read differently, as some 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, qui, instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, misereris, in the second person, sounding either, which in thee, (of thy self) shewest mercy to the orphan, or to the orphan which is in thee, accordingly as the words shall be di∣stinguished in the construction. Others read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for, or because, so taking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher in the same sense that ours do. Tremell us from some other copy, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, w^ch he renders, quoniam in te, i. e. propter te misereris pu∣pilli, because in thee, that is, for thy self, or thine own sake, thou hast mercy on the fatherless. How these any of them agree with that which ours follow, the Reader will perceive at the first sight. We may consider together with these the MS. Arabick version, which hath,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; where in the first place we may observe that he renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which properly signifies, which, who, or what, the other words being put without vowels, his meaning may seem dubious, viz. whether he mean, he that is in thee, or that which is in thee, hath mercy on the fatherless, or else understanding and re∣suming the vocative case from the preceding words in the second verse, take away all ini∣quity, &c. O thou, who in thee, i. e. in, or by, whom the fatherless is pitied, or findeth mercy, which would be no ill rendring, yet I doubt whether or no he did so mean, and did not ra∣ther take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which as we said in the purer Arabick dialect (of which perhaps the Jewish Interpreters in their versions of the Scripture will not be found over observant) doth properly signify, which, who, or what, in as large a signification as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher, in He∣brew, to which it here answers, is taken, and so to signify also as that doth, for, or because. That we may so think, I find in a MS. ver∣sion, whether of the same Author or another, I know not, the same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher, in one of those very places that R. Tanchum brings for proof that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher is sometimes necessarily taken in the significa∣tion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ci, quoniam, for or because. The Vulgar Latin reading, quia ejus qui in te est misereberis pupilli, which the Doway render, because thou wilt have mercy on that pupil which is in thee, takes in both those significations of that word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asher, which we mentioned, viz. because, and which; one of them is sup∣plied by it, which of them it is doubtfull, and which the Author thereof took to be expressed and gave as the signification of the word: as for his whole rendring, we see it differs from that which ours follow. They that adhere to it, noting that the words in the Hebrew do litte∣rally sound, f 1.12 quia, or g 1.13 quod in te misericordiam consequetur pupillus, seeking to reconcile them together, do it by endeavouring to bring the Latin to the same meaning with the Hebrew. So saith Ribera, sensus idem est, the sense is the same, i. e. tu misereberis pupilli, thou wilt have mercy on the fatherless. But there is difference mean while in the construction; in the one, viz. that of the Vulgar, that w^ch is said to be in God, is the pupil, or the fatherless ( h 1.14 by whose being in God they say is meant, who is left to his care, or as i 1.15 others, qui in te, in tuis visceribus per amo∣rem, which is in thee, i. e. in thy bowels by love;) in the other agreeable as he saith to the He∣brew, mercy for the fatherless. The verb is like∣wise changed from the passive 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yerucham, shall be taken into mercy, i. e. find mercy, to which the nominative is the noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yatom, the fatherless, to the active, and (the person also being changed from the third to the second) the nominative made to be God, spoken to as in the vocative case, thou O God wilt have mercy. But this, as we above said, if there were no other change, would make the same meaning.

Sure among all the rendrings given, such are the best as come neerest to the litteral ex∣pression of the Hebrew, and that among them all do none more than ours, with which agree for the most part, the generality of k 1.16 modern Interpreters. Castalio doth alter the constru∣ction, yet so as not to alter the meaning, cum tuum sit misereri pupilli, seeing it is thy pro∣perty, or proper to thee, to have mercy on the fa∣therless. Grotius not much unlike puts as the meaning, quia penes te est, misereri pupillo∣rum, because it is in thy power to have mercy on the fatherless. The ancient Syriack changeth also the passive to the active, with change of the persons necessarily consequent thereon, yet to the same meaning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because thou dost shew mercy to the fatherless; and so are the words part of those which they are instructed to take with them in their address to God, wherein they acknow∣ledge Gods all-sufficient power and mercy, and profess their confidence in it, and confess their own impotency and misery, like that of a poor fatherless child, destitute of help. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yatom, as likewise in the Chaldee and Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yatmo, and in the Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yatim, is looked upon as primarily and properly signifying, a child that is fatherless, or hath no father to take care of him, defend him, or provide for him; and then such a one as being destitute of all help in himself, or from others, is in condition as such a poor child, as miserable, and as obnoxious to inju∣ries and evils. Of such as are by that name known, God is oft elsewhere said to be a helper, a defender, and one that takes espe∣cial care of them. He gives particular com∣mand not to afflict the fatherless child, Ex. 22.22. He doth execute the judgement of the fatherless, Deut. 10.18. stiled therefore a helper of the fatherless, Psalm 10.14. a father to them, Psalm 68.5. and it is given as an expression of of exceeding great anger toward the people, that he will not have mercy on their fatherless, Isaiah 9.17. They therefore being now in such a condition, as may make the title of fatherless agree well with it, are taught to take with them in their address to God that name, of such force in moving him to mercy, and even as it were challenging it as its priviledge, and to apply it to themselves, that God might

have that regard to them, which he hath usually to such. The prescribing to them the use of it, manifestly warns them well to consi∣der and to be sensible of, to lay to heart and acknowledge, their own misery and helples∣ness, and withall how to behave themselves, viz. with such demeanour and carriage, as is usually found in such poor orphans who have none to help them, but such whom by their behaviour they can move to pity them, or at least becometh their condition, viz. lowliness and humility, a broken and contrite heart, as our Savior elsewhere requires in such as will be fit to enter into the kingdom of heaven, * 1.17 such behaviour as is usually in little children. The Chaldee seems to look on that appellation as most properly belonging to their Ance∣stours, such time as they were in Egypt, and the words therefore to respect that condition that they were in, and such mercy as God then shewed to them, his words importing, the kings of Assyria shall not save us, neither will we trust in horsemen, or l 1.18 chariots of horses, neither will we any more say, ours gods, to the works of our hands, for as much as from thee mercy was shewed to our fathers, when they were in Egypt as fatherless children. In this his way the words would be appliable to their present condition by way of a perswasive argument, that God having shewed mercy to their fa∣thers when they were in such a condition, would do the like for them in like case; or else as an expression of their confidence in God, that as he had done to their fathers in as helpless a condition, so he would do now also for them, and be as mercifull to them also; and at once a profession that they did and would depend on him alone for mercy and help. But not to look back on those of old, that Ephraim having forsaken God their gracious father, and put themselves out of his protection, and so being given over by him, and fallen by their iniquity, were in as low, helpless, and miserable condition, as any thing that that name can import or express, is manifest, none being, if they would, able to help or support them. They are taught there∣fore by assuming or applying it to themselves, to confess their own inability, and the inabili∣ty of any other to help them, but God alone; and with profession of their sense thereof to him, in such humble manner, as becometh such, who are in such condition, to make their address for mercy, for the pardon of their sins, and removing such evils which they have de∣servedly brought on themselves, and obtaining such good things, as they have deprived and made themselves unworthy of, disclaiming all trust in others for help, but with humble confidence from him begging, and expecting it. So when they shall with truly penitent hearts turn unto him, and take such words with them, dictated by a broken and contrite spirit, and by unfeigned lips offered up, that they shall not do this in vain, nor lose their labour, but have their iniquities taken away, and be graciously accepted, the following words shew, wherein God in ample manner expresseth how good he will be to them on such their behaviour.

Notes

• t 1.1

  Abarb. also; so Jerom, super equos Aegyptios.
• u 1.2

  See Ribera, Chr. à Cast. Ar. Mont. Sa, Menoch. Tirin.
• w 1.3

  Rivet.
• x 1.4

  See Isaiah c. 30.15, 16.
• y 1.5

  Chap. 8.6.
• z 1.6

  Jun. Trem.
• a 1.7

  As it in Pagnin. Tig. Calvin.
• b 1.8

  Taking no notice of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 le, to.
• c 1.9

  And see Pareus.
• d 1.10

  As 1 Sam. 15.19, 20.
• e 1.11

  See Drus. lectiones in Hos.
• f 1.12

  Ribera.
• g 1.13

  Chr. à Castro.
• h 1.14

  Ribera, Sa, Menoch, Tirin.
• i 1.15

  Corn. à Lap. J. H. Ursin.
• k 1.16

  Whether rendring in te, per te, or apud te.
• * 1.17

  Matt. 18.3, 4.
• l 1.18

  Mercer, equestribus curribus.