A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

v. 14. I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredome, nor your spouses when they commit adultery: for themselves are separated with whores, and they sacrifice with har∣lots: therefore the people that doth not understand shall fall.

Some difference there is betwixt Expositors in giving the meaning of these words; and that, either from assigning a different significa∣tion to some of the words; or from a diffe∣rent reading and distinguishing of them; though at last all will tend to the same scope. As for what concerns the signification of the words, we may observe, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephkod, rendred by ours, punish, is from a root (to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pakad) which hath dif∣ferent significations. Among others, these, to visit, which is a word of comprehension, and to which the rest, or most of them may be re∣duced: this spoken of good, gives us the no∣tion of taking care of, and having regard to, re∣specting and remembring for good, and to do good to: Spoken of evil, as here, it signifies, to re∣member, and take notice of for evil, i.e. to punish. It signifies also to compute, count, or number, to take account of, and (if we may reduce it to this head rather than the former) to take notice of, and to impute to; to omit other notions, as not to the present purpose. These we may take notice of, because according to these we have different expositions, as we said. And l 1.1 some of the Jews, seeming to take the latter no∣tion, thus express the meaning.

There is no reason why I should impute to them their whoredome for sin, because they learn it from the Master of the house. m 1.2 Others, it is not to be wondred, if the daughters commit whoredome, because they themselves going to the tops of mountains, cat and drink with whores, and all commit whoredome.

And so Abarbinel makes the meaning to be no other than,

I wonder not that the daughters do so as they do, when they themselves so do.

But most Christian Interpreters take it as ours do, in the signification of punishing.

Betwixt these two there is that difference, that the former makes that which is said, to imply, a not regarding, or not taking notice at all of what they did, or that they did amiss; as if it were that which they could not but do, being lead by such ill examples as they were, and so were held by him as guiltless for it, and there were no reason for him to impute it as a fault to them; which seems not to come home to the purpose, where great sins and great judgments, to deter from them, are dis∣coursed of: But the latter imports, that he took due notice of what they did; and if he abstained from punishing them, it was not out of neglect, or to lessen the fault, but for an∣other reason, viz. for a punishment to those who were concern'd in them, to whom the not punishing them was so; and so is it ac∣cording to that way a farther declaration of, and addition to, what was before threatned to those Idolaters, as a punishment, in the last words of the preceding verse. Yet do not all, who agree in that, that the word hath here the signification of punishing, agree also in giving the meaning, but do it diversly, accor∣ding as they differently read the words; so that some turn the negative into an affirma∣tive, others make it include one. For some read the words with an interrogation, which though not expressed, they think to be un∣derstood; that so the words may sound, not, I will not, but, shall I not? So ours in the

margin, and so Junius and Tremellius read interrogatively all but the last clause of the verse, should I not punish your daughters, because they commit whoredome, and your spouses, because they commit adultery? Because, or as one would have it, n 1.3 also because, these separate with whores, what they may sacrifice with har∣lots? yes; the people that understand not shall be troubled. The reading it thus, gives it the force (as we said) of a strong affirmative, as much as to say, Certainly I will punish your daughters, and your spouses, because of such their doings; and you also, for that you are separated with whores, &c. i. e. you idolatrous Israel for what you do, though it be put in the third person. But this reading pleaseth not * 1.4 others; and indeed it doth not well agree with the tenor of the words, which is to aggravate their sin by the ill consequences thereof, ex∣cept we should bring it to this meaning, "Should I not punish their daughters for carnal whoredome, when they commit it? how much more them for spiritual? They do not therefore read it interrogatively, but as denunciatory, telling what he will not do.

Yet neither do these agree in giving the meaning: o 1.5 some understanding the words comparatively, or making the negative to be, not such as simply to deny that he will pu∣nish, but that he will not punish one so se∣verely as he will the other, i. e. not their daughters and spouses so greatly as them∣selves, who gave to them an ill example, and by their own lewdness, were a cause and occa∣sion of theirs. p 1.6 So severely will he punish them for their spiritual whoredome, that the punishment which shall be inslicted on their daughters and spouses, shall in comparison to theirs be as nothing, or as if they were not at all punished; so that here in the negative par∣ticle, is an affirmative included, He will not punish so much, yet will punish. This way, though by q 1.7 some preferred, yet is not so well liked by r 1.8 others. There is another way, by taking the words as plainly minatory or threatning, as before he threatned, that by way of punishment to them their daughters should commit whoredome, and their spouses adultery; so now farther, that when they did so, he would not punish them, or by punish∣ment restrain them from their lewdness, but suffer them to run on uncontrolled in it, which could not be but for their great infamy and grief, and so a manifest punishment to them. This way is by r 1.9 many taken, and amongst all seems the plainest, and most agreeable to the words: and it is observed by them, that the greatest punishment, at least a forerunner of it, is when God abstains from punishing, and by timely chastisements to reduce sinners, and stop them from running farther on in their sins, and so into utter destruction. But the threatning to let these lewd women run on without check in their sins, is not here spo∣ken of, so much to intimate his anger against them, and what greater evils remained for them, as to shew his displeasure against their parents; whom, by not punishing but suffer∣ing those whose lewdness could not but be both a disgrace and shame, and so a manifest punishment to them, such as should prove to the utter destruction of their families, he would punish: for such infamy and disho∣nour of families, among temporal judgments and calamities of this life, which here seem chiefly intended, cannot be looked on as small.

The punishment here meant, and which God saith he will not inflict, s 1.10 some of the Jews limit to that bitter water, by which the cha∣stity of suspected women was tried, and they by the effect thereof on them, either absol∣ved or condemn'd: as if the meaning of the words were, that seeing the men were so lewd, as they now were, the lewdness of the women should be no more discovered by this water, nor subject to that curse which by the law was laid upon them at the drinking there∣of, as it is at large described Num. 6.5. from ver. 12. to the end of the chapter, according to a t 1.11 rule that the Talmudical Doctors, thence frame, especially from the last verse of the chapter, and confirme by these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When the man is free from iniquity (viz. uncleanness, or adultery) the water tri∣eth his wife; but if the man be not free from ini∣quity, the water doth not try his wife: and they confirm it from what is here said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will not punish your daughters, &c. they adde also, u 1.12 that when adulterers were multiplied, the bitter water (or tryal thereby) ceased. And they think it proved also from this place, wherein God saith, he will not punish their daugh∣ters when they commit whoredome, &c. viz. w 1.13 be∣cause they themselves were, as the following words shew, guilty in that kind, in both a spi∣ritual and carnal sense.

Thus they restrain what is here said to that peculiar sort of punishment; but the words are more general, I will not punish, without limiting it unto any one kind. Yet seems it well noted by x 1.14 some, that this doth not ar∣gue that they shall be looked upon as fault∣less, and not at all in this life or after it pu∣nished,

but put to shew that the men, who by their evil example gave occasion to them of so offending in such kinds, were more worthy of punishment; of which their desert, the not present punishing of their daughters and spouses might well put them in mind, being it self no small punishment to them, by the grief, disgrace, and infamy, which their seeing them without restraint from God, or chastise∣ments whereby to reclaim them from such shameful doings, to be permitted ro run on in them, must needs occasion to them. They cannot look on this as a mercy from God on their wicked daughters and spouses, whose lewd doings they cannot but know to be odi∣ous to God, but as a punishment from him on themselves, to whom the great dishonour of their doings necessarily redounds. And so is the saying, that he will not punish the one, a manifest threat of punishment to the other; of punishment proportionable to their sin, and such as must needs convince them thereof, by being so proportion'd to it; and the odious∣ness of that to themselves in those that had so neer relation to them, necessarily shews how odious their going a whoring from their God, whose people they should have ap∣proved themselves by their faithfulness to him their father and husband, was. And their un∣faithful dealing with him to be the occasion of what he threatens to do, or rather not to do, viz. not to punish their lewd daughters and spouses for their wickedness, but rather to permit them to run on uncontrolled in it, to their great grief and infamy, the following words declare. To the consideration of which we are, by looking on these words as minato∣ry, and understanding the lewdness of the wo∣men mentioned as voluntary acts, in not re∣straining them from which by any chastise∣ments the punishment threatned to the men consists, kindly and properly brought.

Yet before we proceed to the consideration of them, we may call to mind what we said on the preceding verse; that some think that those acts are not so much to be looked on as voluntary, but to be understood as forced defilements, and see how the present threat will then require to be understood, that it may be applied to them.

That they should be so defiled, and no pu∣nishment executed on those that defile them, would be indeed to the fathers and husbands a great punishment, but more to the poor women themselves, who having not consented to such wickedness, cannot be thought wor∣thy of punishment for having received wrong; and how shall he then say by way of threat, that he will not punish them? If it be there∣fore so understood of what they should by violence suffer from the enemy; it should, as a y 1.15 learned Divine observes, be rather said, I will not visit or punish for your daughters, i. e. for their sakes, so as to take vengeance on them that offer violence to them; and so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Al benothecem, accordingly rendred, propter filias vestras, or in gratiam filiarum ve∣strarum, which however it would make a good sense, yet because there is not found any other example of such use and construction of the Verb and Preposition here used, he thinks not safe to adventure on that way: and there∣fore it may seem safest and plainest so to un∣derstand it, as we have said, that by their whoredome may be understood voluntary acts of their own; and then the not restraining them by timely chastisements from them, but permiting them to run on in them to the in∣famy of their relations, may well be threat∣ned as an aggravation of the punishment to them; in which kind why God sees here fit to threaten to punish them, he farther declares in the following words, the reason which be∣fore was in the 13. v. given.

Their punishment that was before threat∣ned, that their daughters and spouses should be given up to vile affections, to the commit∣ting of whoredome and adultery, and not restrained by God's grace, is here aggravated by that which is more sensible, that he would suffer them to run on in those sins, (as if he connived at them, which would not have been done, but for greater punishment to those their relations) without restraining them by any present visible punishment. The crime which he would punish by such infamous be∣haviour of those women related to them, there expressed to be their going a whoring from God, and serving Idols, is here ampli∣fied by a farther declaration of their behaviour in the worshipping of those Idols to which they sacrificed on the tops of the mountains, and hills, under oaks and other shady trees, viz. that they were separated with whores, and sacrifi∣ced with harlots. Which if understood of whores and harlots, properly so called, (as it may well be, and, I suppose, ought to be) addes to what was before said, That whereas there they were accused more peculiarly of spiritual whoredome, they are here accused of carnal al∣so; so as that the giving up their daughters and spouses to that, will be a causing them to suffer in the same kind that they offended in, and receive like for like, grief, disgrace, and dishonour to themselves and their families, in the same way that they grieved and disho∣noured God, and so shew their punishment to be every way proportionable to the•• crime; so as that they, who by their own ill example gave occasion to their daughters and spouses, and taught them to commit such lewdness, could not but by their wickedness be warned

of their own; and by seeing them not to suf∣fer what they deserved, be put in mind what themselves deserved to suffer, and so discern the one by the other, and be forced to ac∣knowledge God's justice in punishing sin in them, by the like sin in theirs, which he per∣mitted, and gave them up, without restraint by punishment, to commit, which without their provocation of him by their own sins he would not have permitted.

Thus will the sense be clear, if by the words here we understand to be shewed, that they were guilty of carnal whoredomes, to∣gether with spiritual, as they did usually go together; and they that were given to Ido∣latry, were wont to pollute themselves with all manner of filthiness of the flesh also, whoredome, and adultery, and such unclean∣ness as is not fit to be mentioned. But it will not be obscure to discern, how the punishment is fitted to the sin likewise, though we should take the sin in them by these words described, to be yet no other than spiritual whoredome and idolatry; and so z 1.16 some take it to be, and by whores, and harlots, to be meant the Idols, to the service of which they separated themselves, and to which they sacrificed, or the shameful ser∣vices performed in honour to them. And in deed if Idolatry be (as most frequently it is) called whoredome, there must be something in that as either the Idols themselves, or their worship, that may be called whores or har∣lots. And so to interpre•• those names here, to the learned Rivet seems to be primaria & praecipua interpretatio quae scopum attingit: the primary and chief interpretation which gives the scope of the words.

Among the Jews, Abarbinel doth so far concur with these, as to think (as we before said) that the whoredome here spoken of, is that of Idolatry, but then he differs from them, in that he doth not think the Idols or their services to be noted by the terms of whores, or harlots; but their own wives therefore so called, because they and their husbands se∣parated themselves together, and committed whoredome in sacrificing to Idols and false Gods, and in worshipping them: So that their daughters also and daughters in law lear∣ned of them to do the like, viz. to commit like spiritual whoredome. But a 1.17 others of the Jews, it is manifest, understand this as a description of carnal uncleanness and whore∣dome properly so called, in that while they went to those remote or secret places, they there mingled themselves with whores and harlots, and kept company, and did eat and drink with them, and committed that folly with them, which by b 1.18 those terms is easily understood; in which they agree with the Chaldee Paraphrast, who renders, for they al∣so gather themselves together with whores, and eat and drink with c 1.19 such as gad abroad, (or common whores, that seek abroad for oppor∣tunity, and prostitute themselves.) The same way take also d 1.20 several of Christian Interpre∣ters; Zanchius thinks it convenient to take in both, and would have in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hem im hazzonoth yepharedu, them∣selves are separated with whores, by whores to be understood Idolatry; and by harlots, in they sacrifice with harlots, those properly so called, and carnal uncleanness; which as to the including of both those sorts of whore∣dome in what they are accused of, is that way of exposition which we at first mentioned, and think most convenient to follow; yet not because of that nice distinction between whores and harlots, which he gives, but from the drift of the whole argument. And the forementioned Dr. Rivet, though he prefer that Exposition concerning spiritual whore∣dome as chief, yet saith, that he doth not re∣ject the opinion of those, who together take in also carnal whoredome, as together with it comprehended in what they are taxed as guil∣ty of.

Having seen this as for the meaning and scope of the words in general, we may for the better understanding the charge laid on them, look into the signification of the words singly, because all do not fully agree in them; And in them we shall find, first, a change of person in the Pronoun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hem, they, in the third person, whereas in the foregoing words the second is used, your daughters, and your spouses; and so according to the usual way of consequence it would be, yee your selves are separated. This by e 1.21 divers Expositors is observed as a thing that hath weight in it, and is a sign of great indignation, and that God in the midst of his speaking to them doth (as it were) turn away from them as un∣worthy to be spoken to, and not vouchsafe to speak to them as in person. But such change of persons is not unusual in Scripture; we have the like but in the foregoing verse, and there, contrary to what is here, we have a change from the third person to the second, from they to your, speaking first as of them, then as to them, though concerning the same business that here he continues to speak of.

The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yepharedu, next in con∣struction, and rendred by ours, are separa∣ted, signifies barely, do separate or divide,

without expressing what they separate, but leaving it to be understood or supplied. It is by f 1.22 some supplied by se, i.e. themselves, which is the easiest supply, and is by ours manifest∣ly followed, while they render the word pas∣sively, g 1.23 are separated, which is all one with they separate themselves, &c. as likewise by others, who do in like manner render it, whi∣ther it be understood as h 1.24 from God and his worship, or with i 1.25 some from their wives and families, or with k 1.26 others from other compa∣ny, l 1.27 or the congregation to go apart into such places as are before mentioned, hills and groves, as fittest for their lewd purposes, and there to be with those whose company they sought, one of which will be understood and supposed with the other, and that whither by whores we understand their Idol-worship, (as we have seen some thereby to understand) or lewd prostitute women.

Others do otherwise supply that which they are to be understood to have separated, viz. res opimas domi suae, the fat and choice things which they had at their house, which they culled out and took away, that under pretence of religion they might openly in the sight of men spend them with whores. So those lear∣ned Authors of a joynt Translation, Junius and Tremellius, who joyning these words with those that follow, thus render them, that they with whores do separate those things which they may sacrifice with harlots; and then give for explication that note which we have mentioned. m 1.28 Some without any supply translate the word by the Latin, dividunt, do divide, and then fix on it a signification of ob∣scenity. But, though the whole expression doth imply their lewdness, yet I doubt whi∣ther that critical observation, as to the signi∣fication of this particular word, doth so pro∣perly agree to the Hebrew word as it doth to his Latin; the Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, with, which requires to be expressed, they divide (not whores, but) with whores, plainly frustrates it, and besides there is no need of it. The Scrip∣ture speaking of foul things, yet expresseth them in clean termes, which is one cause, as a great n 1.29 Jewish Doctor tells us, why the He∣brew tongue is called, the Holy Tongue.

The Chaldee Paraphrast rendring it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mistayeon, are gathered together (or keep com∣pany) with whores; and the Vulgar Latin, con∣versabantur, conversed with, and the Greek, Syriack, and o 1.30 printed Arabick, were mingled with; give us the meaning, though not the li∣teral signification of the word; the end of their going apart, or separating themselves from others, being that they might keep company, converse and joyn themselves with those alone, which otherwise they could not do.

Other meanings and significations some of the Jewish Expositors suggest unto us; so another meaning, though retaining the same signification of separating, Kimchi mentions, viz. They separate wives from their husbands, that they may commit lewdness with them. He saith the words may be so interpreted, but I know not how the construction will bear it, for it is not said, they separate whores, but they se∣parate with whores, though probably those whores might be such as for that end separa∣ted themselves either by their enticements, or for filthy lust sake, as these did themselves from their wives, which is the interpretation before given, and by Kimchi himself given in the first place, as the best.

But another signification also he mentions, which he saith his father thought the word to have, and that is by fetching it from the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pered, which signifies a Mule, than which creature, though unapt for gene∣ration, he saith there is none more salacious or lustful; so that according to this derivation of the word, the signification should be, that they were profuse, and preposterous, and bru∣tish in committing whoredome, like the Mule, indulging without understanding or measure to their lusts, and all manner of unclean∣ness.

And there is yet by another p 1.31 Jew given yet another signification, who derives it from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Perudoth, which occurs Joel 1.17. and is there by the Chaldee Para∣phrast rendred, vessels of wine; according to which it would import, that q 1.32 they filled them∣selves with wine, or made themselves like bar∣rels, or the like, or drank up vessels in the com∣pany of whores; which though they probably did, yet it will be both as to the derivation and signification of the word, a far fetched notion. That which ours follow is much plainer, and (I think) among all, the most proper.

It must by the way be remembred, (like to what hath been already observed) that the Verb here is of the Future tense, which in the Hebrew tongue, as the sense requires, may be rendred by almost any other, whe∣ther denoting past, present, or time to come; and r 1.33 denotes a continuation of the thing spo∣ken of, and therefore is by several interpre∣ters, as they thought would best make out the meaning, severally rendred: by some, s 1.34 they did, or t 1.35 have done; by some, u 1.36 they will

do; by w 1.37 some, as by ours, they do so; which makes no difference as to the sense, all de∣claring their customary lewdness. Which is likewise to be observed of the following Verb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yezzabbechu, which is by all literal inter∣preters rendred in its proper notion of sacri∣ficing, but in different tenses; by some, x 1.38 did sacrifice; by others, y 1.39 have sacrificed; by z 1.40 o∣thers, will sacrifice; by others, (as by ours) do sacrifice, or they sacrifice. The Chaldee paraphraseth it, they eat and drink with common strumpets, not that he would give a different signification of the word, but to shew for what end they did sacrifice with them, as Kim∣chi explains his meaning, They offer sacrifice with them, that so they might eat and drink with them, and so consequently commit whore∣dome with them; as the children of Israel of old did with the daughters of Moab, Num. 25.1, 2. these things usually going together a∣mong Idolaters, and making up their wor∣ship.

That the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hazzonoth, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hakkedeshoth, do signifie, as they are by ours rendred, whores, and harlots, there is no question; and no greater difference is there between them, than between those words in our English tongue, except we may think the latter to signifie something more lewd than the former, common prostitute whores, who give themselves wholly to uncleanness, and seek all occasions of it, (whether called so by an a 1.41 Antiphrasis, or way of expression by the contrary, from the signification of its root, which signifies holy, as being most unholy; or from that other notion thereof which is, to se∣parate, or destine, or wholly devote to a thing.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Manuscript Arabick Ver∣sion hath it, common to all; and so the Chaldee expression, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Naphkath bara, such as go (or gad) abroad; and the Sy∣riack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nophkoth shuke, such as that go about the streets, seems to inti∣mate, agreeable to that description of an im∣pudent whore, Prov. 7.11, 12. &c. and 9.14. &c. although others extend the name to sinks of filthiness of both sexes; and the Latin ren∣dring it by effoeminatis, b 1.42 the effeminate; and the LXX. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with initiated persons, and others 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, changed persons, such as may be described by the Apostles words, Rom. 1.1, 2. give to Expositors here occasion of in∣quiring into the obscene rites and beastly un∣cleanness used of old among Idolaters in the service of their false Gods. But as it is not necessary, so I think neither convenient to rake into such filth. It is sufficient that we take the names in their ordinary and usual sig∣nifications; and then the onely question will be, whether we should understand what is spoken either as a description of spiritual or carnal whoredome, (as we before said,) or (which may perhaps be most convenient) so as to comprehend both. Either way understood they set out the great wickedness of that peo∣ple, which by, and in, their going a whoring from God, they committed; so great, that he will not longer forbear to punish them. For so, besides what hath been already said, the fol∣lowing words also assure us, with which as at inference from those former, or necessary con∣sequent on them, he concludes, therefore the people c 1.43 that doth not understand, shall fall, or, as in the Margin, be punished; according to which Translation, and such as agree with it, I shall expound the words in the first place.

Therefore; that which ours so translate, is in the Original the Particle or Conjunction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, which properly signifies and, and is so only by most translated, but (as hath been else∣where observed) hath often the force of an Illative, as much as to say therefore, and is so here by ours, and d 1.44 some others also taken; and though it be otherwise rendred by others, yet will all amount to much the same purpose, to make these words a conclusion of the for∣mer, in which is denounced certain punish∣ment to them, e 1.45 with a repetition of the cause for which it shall be inflicted. So when the Chaldee renders this clause by way of inter∣rogation, whereas he rendred the former po∣sitively, with addition of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nonne? and shall not the people of a generation which doth not understand the law, be dashed? what is that but certainly to affirm, or conclude, that therefore seeing things were so with them, it should also, as to that punishment, be so with them? And when Junius and Tremel. who had ren∣dred the former clauses interrogatively, (as we have seen) do, without interrogation, with a note of positive affirmation, read these, Imo populus non intelligens conturbabitur, yea certain∣ly the people that understandeth not, shall be trou∣bled, what is it but a plain inference from the former, which they make to be a question whether they should not be punished, by way of answer, that yes certainly they should? And if it be rendred by autem, (as by some f 1.46 it is,) but, it will be no less according to that way, assuring, that though he might forbear to punish their daughters and spouses, be∣cause they their fathers were so wicked, and gave them such occasion and example; yet they themselves who would not understand better, should not escape being punished.

The people that doth not understand: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

Lo yabin, that doth not, or will not, for the Verb is of the Future tense, and may be both ways rendred, and also as if it were the Pre∣ter tense, (as hath been observed before of the use of Futures,) and is so according to all those ways rendred, non intelligit, doth not; non intelliget, will not; non intellexit, hath not, understood; and in the Tigurin Version, noluit intelligere, would not understand. The Vulgar Latin reads, & populus non intelligens, g 1.47 the people not understanding; which is the same with ours, that doth not understand. The Greek in the ordinary Editions hath quite contrary, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is understanding, or, doth under∣stand; but I do not doubt that it is an errour in the reading, though ancient, so that the printed Arabick follows the same, and that it should be, and was at first, meant, h 1.48 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that doth not undirstand; and so the Arab. Manu∣script Version hath it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and the Sy∣riack also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that doth not un∣derstand.

The adding this Epithete doth, as describe the condition of the people spoken of, so in∣clude at once a reason why that which fol∣lows, is denounced against them.

The people, we take to be Israel, those that have all along hitherto been spoken, either to, or of; of them it is said, v. 1. that there was no knowledge of God in the land, and v. 6. that they were destroyed for lack of knowledge: whi∣ther their ignorance was through the default of the i 1.49 Priests, who themselves running af∣ter Idols did neglect to teach them better, or their own in refusing to learn better, or both (as it seems they did) concurring; for the Priests lips should have kept knowledge among them, and they should have sought the law at his mouth. Malac, 2.7. but they rejected know∣ledge, (this ch. v. 6.) not onely the Priests there spoken of, but the people also. For if they would have known better, though the Priest neglected his duty, they had the law given them by God to consult, and their neg∣lect of so doing on all parts, makes them such as to be called a people that doth not under∣stand, and at once implies (as we said) the reason why what follows is denounced a∣gainst them, k 1.50 viz. because they do not under∣stand.

If they should pretend ignorance for excuse to themselves in their idolatrous courses, it is so far from excusing them, as to aggravate both their crime and punishment; for it must needs be willing and contracted. God had so far revealed his will, and such ways as he had ordained for his worship and their pra∣ctice, and given them his law, and sent his Pro∣phets to direct them; as that if they had not chosen to be ignorant, they might have easily known, yea could not but have known what they ought to have done, and how to serve him, and that it was their duty to serve him in that manner, and him alone: and therefore because they were a people that did not under∣stand, and for that very cause, because they did not understand, is that which follows de∣nounced as a consequent on what, not know∣ing to do better, they did; and that is in the last word of the v. expressed by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yilla∣bet, which ours render, shall fall, and in the margin put, as for choice to the Reader, or be punished. Others do give other expositions of the word, but most of them such as will be comprehended under these, or reduced to them. The Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall be dashed, (for that signification the word hath, and seems most to agree to this place, although l 1.51 others expound it in another signification, which it likewise hath, desertus est, is forsaken, or shall be forsaken.) The Vulgar La∣tin, vapulabit, shall be beaten; m 1.52 others, con∣turbabitur, shall be troubled, confounded, or disturbed; n 1.53 others, cespitabit, shall stumble; o 1.54 others, labetur, shall slip, or fall; p 1.55 others, variis jactabitur malis, shall be tossed with ma∣ny evils; q 1.56 others, corrner, shall fall, viz. into darkness of errour, or into calamities, or into sin, all together; r 1.57 or stupebit, or stupore afficietur, shall be amazed and perplexed; s 1.58 others saying it signifies, irretitum esse, to be intangled, so as not to know how to free themselves; t 1.59 impli∣cabitur, shall be intangled. What u 1.60 another hath, that it signifies to shake, or beat down, as leaves or nuts are with a staff from a tree, though it might well agree with the others in the notion of being beaten, or cast down, yet w 1.61 wants proof to shew that it is the proper no∣tion of the word.

The Jewish Expositors for the most agree with these; and because the word seldome occurs in the Scriptures, as onely here, and Prov. 10.8, 10. (where ours render in both places, shall fall, but in the margin there put, shall be beaten,) and so they have no other helps in the Hebrew tongue, to direct them to the meaning and signification of it, some of them fly for help to the Arabick language of nigh affinity to it, that so by comparing it with such words as from the same root are found in that, they may judge of the signifi∣cation of it here. Among the rest, Kimchi in his Dictionary having first said that it signifies shall be perverted, tells us, that his Father saith, that among the notions of the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Labat, there be two which will agree to this place;

the first is that whereby it signifies, to make hast, according to which he saith it may be here expounded, will be hasty, and not give themselves time to think and consider what to do, or how to perform God's command∣ment; the second, that whereby it denotes, to halt, and then according to that the mean∣ing will be, will in that which is commanded halt between two opinions, and shall not be able to di∣scern the truth. He himself in his exposition seems to joyn both these, telling us, that ac∣cording to what his father and others confir∣med from the Arabick tongue, the signification is, shall be perplexed in mind, (or opinion,) like a man that is so perplexed or confounded, that he knows not what he should do. Himself otherwise expounds it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall stumble, or fall. But I cannot but think that he is mi∣staken in relating the first notion by his father given, or else that his father was mistaken in reporting it from his Author whom he fol∣lowed, viz. by miss-reading it (if it were not miss-written) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies, to make hast, instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as it is in the great Grammarian AbuWalid written, in his Dictionary, and which the Arabick Wri∣ters in their Dictionaries put for a notion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Labata, and signifies, to be cast or thrown down. And although the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 do sometimes signifie also, to run, yet compa∣ring what AbuWalid saith, I doubt not but there is an errour by some means or other in it, which is to be rectified in that manner as we have seen out of him; who also besides this gives, as Kimchi's father doth, an other sig∣nification of the word out of the Arabick tongue, viz. the notion of halting in a very ill manner; but the first he thinks more agreeable to this place. Aben Ezra saith, it signifies in the Ismaelitish, that is, the Arabick tongue, to be so perplexed as not to know what to do, and so it doth, (viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be amazed, or in confusion, or to be troubled,) and that he takes for the meaning here. R. Salomo Jar∣chi gives yet another meaning of the word, which is, shall be wearied, to wit, by being smitten with vengeance, (judgments, or punish∣ments.)

These all which we have hitherto mentio∣ned, as well Jews as Christians, we look on as going one way, viz. as agreeing in this, that the persons spoken of are the idolatrous people of Israel, and that which is said con∣cerning them, denotes punishment to them: whatever different expressions we have hither∣to seen used in the translating of the word, in which it is denounced, tend all to the x 1.62 same scope, and will be comprehended under, or easily reduced to, those given us by our Trans∣lators, shall fall, or shall be punished.

And this way seems the most convenient to be followed; yet because some of good note do take others, it will not be amiss to take notice of what they say, that the Reader may at last judge. Some there are, that neither take the persons to be the whole people of Israel, nor what is said to be denounced by way of punishment to those spoken of; but by, the people that doth not understand, to be meant those silly women called before, their daughters, and spouses, or daughters in law, and that which is spoken of them to be as either a de∣claration of the cause of their miscarrying as they did, viz. their want of understanding, which made them subject to errour, or else (as it were) an excuse of them for it, and a reason why God would not punish them, though they did amiss, viz. because they un∣derstood no better, and having opportuni∣ties and occasions, and so ill examples given them by the men, were almost necessitated, at least strongly tempted and induced to do as they did. So R. Tanchum, shewing first the signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yillabet, to be, shall be cast down or fall, shall be troubled, or brought into confusion, or shall be amazed and in perplexity, then gives what he takes to be the meaning of this clause in conjunction with the rest of the verse, to this purpose; That this here said is a giving of the cause, why he would not reprove (or punish) those women, their daughters and spouses, (or daughters in law,) viz. because of their ignorance and want of insight into matters; for that the fault was in the men, who being themselves separated with whores and harlots, gave occasion also to them of being left to the company of such, the intent of whose idolatrous worship was to sa∣tisfie the lusts of the body; and when the men, who should understand better, were themselves so deceived, and permitted them to be alone, and consort with those lewd women of the Idolaters, what should women, who had little understanding, do? The fault was the mens, and therefore he saith, I will not punish &c. not that the meaning is, (as was above mentioned,) that they (those wo∣men) should not at all be punished, but that the men more deserved to be punished, seeing they put them on those hazards; because of which, they being of little understanding, and not able to discern what was noxious, easily fell, as he saith, and the people that under∣standeth not, shall fall, or be in confusion. The same way doth Abarbinel also take, who will have by those words, the people that doth not un∣derstand, to be meant those young silly women

mentioned, their daughters and spouses, which could not but easily stumble and fall into such idolatrous courses, (as before we have seen that he thinks meant here by whoredome) as they saw their fathers and mothers to take, and that his saying, I will not punish them, is to shew that it was not to be wondred that they should so do.

Among Christian Interpreters Arias Monta∣nus also follows him in this way, saying, Populum non intelligentem mulierculas vocat, the people that understandeth not, he calls the wo∣men; and for better expressing the Emphasis of the words, he would have them read rather Ironically, or by way of interrogation, than as a plain asseveration, to this purpose, when the men do so as is described, shall they escape, and the poor women a people that wants understanding, being by the neglect of their care exposed, and by their ill example corrupted, be by me pu∣nished?

The Author of the manuscript Arabick trans∣lation, takes by the people that understandeth not, to be meant the people of Israel that then was, but gives to the last word spoken of them a notion different from any that we have yet seen, such as makes it a de∣scription of their behaviour, while God by his Prophets reproved them for their faults, and denounced his judgments against them, rather than of any evil that should befall them, thus rendring this clause, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the people that understandeth not Yaphkamo; by which word, that we may understand what he meaneth, he addes a note in more words to explain it, that by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yillabet, in the Original, is meant, that when there comes to them a Prophet or reprover, to find fault with their doings, they are insolent toward him, and scoff at his words. And in the same sense he thinks the word to be taken, Prov. 10.8, 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 so that according to him the word Yillabet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should signi∣fie, to be insolent, petulant, contumelious in their behaviour, for that signification well enough agrees to y 1.63 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by which he translates it.

The Greek of the LXX, goes in a way dif∣ferent from all these, rendring, the people that understandeth not, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was joyned with a whore. How it came to passe that they so render it, is observed by Drusius, viz. by not distinguishing the words as others have done, they took in the word whore, from the beginning of the next v. instead of what is in the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zoneh, playing the harlot, reading Zonah, an harlot; and taking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, If, to be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, with: why they so did, I find no account given. This reading disturbs the sense both of the present, and following verse, yet seems it ancient; for both the Syriack, as now read in this place, and the printed Arabick agree with it. If he had stopped at 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, without adding the rest, it had agreed with what others have, and sig∣nified, was intangled.

Notes

• l 1.1

  R. Dav. Kimchi.
• m 1.2

  Aben Ezra.
• n 1.3

  Pisc.
• * 1.4

  Gatak.
• o 1.5

  Vat. Pare.
• p 1.6

  Munst. and see Chr. à Castro.
• q 1.7

  Pare.
• r 1.8

  Rivet.
• r 1.9

  Jerom. &c.
• s 1.10

  See R. Salomo.
• t 1.11

  Sotah. c. 5. f. 28. and c. 9. f. 47. §. 2. Kiddushin. f. 27. §. 2. Shebuoth. f. 5. Yebamoth. f. 55.
• u 1.12

  ib.
• w 1.13

  Compare Jo. 7.7. Judex non potest procedere utroque adulterante. Chr. à Castro.
• x 1.14

  R. Tanch. Aben Ezra.
• y 1.15

  Rivet.
• z 1.16

  Calvin. Rivet.
• a 1.17

  R. Sal. Jarchi. Ab. Ezra. R. David Kimchi.
• b 1.18

  See Sanct.
• c 1.19

  And the Syriac by the same terme expresset it
• d 1.20

  Arias Moat. Petr. à Fig. See Pagnin. in the ancienter editions of the Interlin.
• e 1.21

  Calv. Zanch. Ribera. Rivet. Tarnov.
• f 1.22

  Lively.
• g 1.23

  And so R. Tanch. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• h 1.24

  Calv. Rivet,
• i 1.25

  Kimchi. Pagnin.
• k 1.26

  Drus. Grot.
• l 1.27

  Mercer.
• m 1.28

  Drus. and see Rivet.
• n 1.29

  Maimonides in Moreh. l. 3. c. 8.
• o 1.30

  For the MS. hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• p 1.31

  R. Menachem. cited by R, Sal. Jar••hi in a MS. copy, of whom is also another exposition, taking the word to signify the common permission or following of lewdness.
• q 1.32

  See Petr, à Fig.
• r 1.33

  Petr. à Fig.
• s 1.34

  Vulg. Lat.
• t 1.35

  Interlin.
• u 1.36

  Tig.
• w 1.37

  Pagn. Grot.
• x 1.38

  Vulg.
• y 1.39

  Mont. Interlin.
• z 1.40

  Tig.
• a 1.41

  Drus.
• b 1.42

  Doway Transl.
• c 1.43

  That, is printed in other letters, as not expressed in the Hebrew.
• d 1.44

  Cast. Itaque. Tarnov. Idcirce.
• e 1.45

  Rivet.
• f 1.46

  Pagnin.
• g 1.47

  Doway Transl.
• h 1.48

  See Drus.
• i 1.49

  See Drus.
• k 1.50

  See Jun. Trem.
• l 1.51

  Buxt. greater Lexicon.
• m 1.52

  Jun. Trem.
• n 1.53

  Interlin.
• o 1.54

  Munst.
• p 1.55

  Tig.
• q 1.56

  See Drus.
• r 1.57

  See Vatabl.
• s 1.58

  Rivet. Vat.
• t 1.59

  Schindl.
• u 1.60

  O••col.
• w 1.61

  Tarnov.
• x 1.62

  Vapulabit, caedetur, corruet, impinget, dejicietur, &c. in eandem rem conveniunt. Significant enim poenam populi non intelligentis. Petr. à Fig.
• y 1.63

  Which Kamus renders by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be petulant, to scorn the truth, and refuse it, &c. among other significations.