A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

v. 17. Ephraim is joined to Idols: let him alone.

By Ephraim is here meant the same that is meant by Israel, in the foregoing words, viz. the ten Tribes, as distinct from the other two of Judah and Benjamin, though in it self it were a name proper only to one of those ten. But it was one of chief note and power among them; and of that was Jeroboam, who first headed them, and set up a distinct King∣dom among them, separate from the King∣dom of Judah, and who first also set up the worship of Idols, to wit, the Calves among them. For such like reasons is its name often so used, as to comprehend all the rest, as one body, and so here spoken of as one person, of whom it is said, that he is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chabur atsabbim, i. e. as ours trans∣late it, joyned to Idols. Other expressions are used by others in the rendring of the words in their several languages, but all coming to the same pass, and concurring in the mean∣ing; as whether they sound, r 1.1 is a companion of Idols, s 1.2 a partaker of (or with) Idols, t 1.3 min∣gled or having consortship with Idols, or v 1.4 bound to Idols: What do these, any of them, tend to, but to express their being so addicted to them, and so to cleave to them, as that they will not part with them, or be parted from them on any termes, or by any perswasions? The name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Atsabbim, by which those their beloved Idols are here named, is some∣thing, which, according to the import of its Root, signifies griefs, troubles; and so Idols, as being things of, or causing grief or trou∣ble to those that follow them, but not being for help or profit to them; yet doth soolish Ephraim, forsaking Gods service which is both pleasant and profitable, inseparably cleave to them, and will not be cured of her madness in running after them; and therefore as despairing of them, according to what ours and most other Translators and Interpreters read, he addes, Let him alone.

But in both the translating and giving the meaning of these words, (which are in the Original 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hannach lo) there is difference among Interpreters. They who agree (as the most of them do) as to the si••nification of the words, that they signifie, as they are by ours rendred, let him alone; yet differ in their opinions concerning the persons, speak∣ing, and spoken to. Many take the person speaking, to be God; the person spoken to, to be the Prophet. So do, among the Jews, R. Salomo Jarchi, and R. David Kimchi; and among Christians, * 1.5 many of good note. The sense according to this will be, that seeing they are obstinate in their idolatrous ways, and incorrigible, the Prophet should not far∣ther seek in vain to reclaim them, as being but lost labour, but suffer them to run on to their own peril. Which way of dealing with them is evidently a token of great indigna∣tion; as among men the same method would be, if a w 1.6 father to a son, or a friend, to whom he had wished well, should use it, viz. a threatning of him, because he had hitherto refused to hearken to his admonitions, that no more of them should by himself or any other be cast away upon him, but he should be left to his wilful courses, as one whose case was desperate. Under a seeming to spare or forbear, it includes, as R. Tanchum notes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a threatning; as it would be to say, Let him alone, and you shall after see what punishment or mischief shall befall them. And in this way taken, as the words of God to the Prophet, they may be looked on as spo∣ken not onely to the present individual Pro∣phet in particular, but any other who might admonish or reprove them; Ne arguito eum quispiam, as that learned man expresseth it, let not any reprove him; so implying, that nei∣ther he himself would, nor would have his Prophet or any other person do it: As it would in common language be understood, if any should say of one with whom he were angry, or to whom he intended no good, Let

him alone, spéaking at large without design∣ing any person, and implying, you shall see what will become of him; and withall arguing a contempt or neglect of him, as one that were not worthy to be regarded, as Abarbinel saith the words may be looked on as importing; but then he would have the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Han∣nach, to be taken as the Infinitive, not the Imperative, and to sound, It is to leave him, that is, he is to be left alone, of which change I suppose there is no need, the one will im∣port the other; Let him alone, implies, he is fit to be let alone, to be not regarded.

With the words taken in this meaning may be compared that which we read Ezek. 20.39. As for you, O house of Israel, thus saith the Lord God, Go ye, serve ye every one his Idols, &c. and that also, x 1.7 Jer. 7.16. Pray not for this people, neither lift up your cry nor prayer for them, &c. This seeming permission of them to go on uncontrolled in their idolatrous ways in the first place, and his forbidding his Prophet in the 2^d to have any more to do with them, we cannot look on but as a token of highest indignation, and as severe a threat of evil to them, as could in any positive terms have been ex∣pressed; and so likewise look we on the words here, so understood as we have seen, and such as by setting the danger of their condi∣tion before their eyes, as beyond remedy, should have been a forcible motive to have wrought in them speedy repentance. Which effect Aben Ezra seems to think that God expected it should have on them, by his ex∣pounding it, Let them alone, till y 1.8 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 their wine, that is, their sottishness, depart from them; perhaps they will open their eyes. So would his dealing with them be according to the dealing of a father with a disobedient son, whom he had threatned no more to speak to, no more to have to do with, or shew regard to, and yet should upon any shew of amendment, again meet and receive him. And so according to this way of taking the person speaking to be God, and the per∣son spoken to, to be the Prophet, have we in this v. also, as we intimated, a farther declaration of Israel's sin, and of the ill con∣sequent on it, or a denouncing of punishment to them for it.

But z 1.9 others not a few, nor of less autho∣rity, take the person speaking to be the Pro∣phet, and the person spoken to, the tribe of Judah, before mentioned; and then the words will be a prohibition to those of Judah, that they joyn not themselves to Israel, for the reason mentioned, viz. because they are joyned to Idols, lest they be insnared and corrupted by them, and be brought to be partakers with them in their idolatrous ways. For prefer∣ring this way before the other, a 1.10 some think it an argument, because the Prophet had before turned himself to Judah, and spake to them, (from v. 15.) so that in attributing these words to God would be an abrupt change of persons. Yet b 1.11 others, who considered both of them, think the former the more genuine. In this variety of judgments, the Reader may use his own: however both agree in rendring the words, let him alone, or to that purpose. But there are others, who (as we intimated) differ from them in rendring of them; among whom may be reckoned the Chaldee Para∣phrast, according as his words are by the Latin Translators of him usually rendred; his words are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebaku lehon yat pulchona, which, according to the Latin Translation in the Polyglot Bibles, and other Editions, sound, c 1.12 dereliquerunt suam religio∣nem, they have left (or forsaken) their religion. d 1.13 Cappellus renders it, permiserunt sili Idola, they have permitted to themselves Idols, (under∣standing them by, worship,) and notes, that they read the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hannach, in the Hebrew, not as in the Imperative mood, but in the praeterperfect tense; but e 1.14 Buxtorf well observes, that there is no necessity to think so, seeing the Chaldee Verb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebaku, may be as well the Imperative, as the Praeter∣tense, and then the words will be, leave to them their religion or worship, which then will be all one in sense with the former rendring of the Hebrew, let him alone, viz. to his Idols, which is understood; only that whereas the Hebrew puts it in the singular number, let thou him alone, he puts it in the plural, which ac∣cording to either way of the former exposi∣tions, which we have seen, will be agreable enough; according to the first, which maketh God to speak to the Prophet, intimating only, that other of Gods messengers or people were as well comprehended, as this particu∣lar Prophet; and according to the second way, taking Judah in the plural, (as well we may, that name being a name of multitude) and all others that had not yet forsaken God for Idols. The Greek hath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he hath f 1.15 put (or placed) scandals (or offences) to himself, viz. by setting up Idols to himself, and wor∣shipping them: And the printed Arabick fol∣lows it; they manifestly read the Verb as in the preterperfect tense, and so make the words to belong to the description of Ephraim's sin, and not to be an address either from God to the Prophet, or from the Prophet to Ju∣dah.

Among the Jews, Abarbinel, besides that Exposition from him already mentioned, of making the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hannach to be the Infinitive mood, and so declaring what ought to be done, rather than an express bidding to do it, (though in that retaining the same sig∣nification that others do,) gives also another meaning, which he seems to look on as the best, by taking the word to be from another root, and of another signification, viz. not from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yanach, which signifies to put, and place, and also to suffer, permit, or leave, to which others refer it, but from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nuach, or Nach, which hath the signification of being quiet, and at rest and ease, that so the meaning should be, that Ephraim is at rest or ease, or giveth himself to ease and pleasure, according to what the people thereof elsewhere were taxed for, for giving themselves as to Idola∣try, so to drunkenness and voluptuousness, as Is. 28.1, 3, 7. and so it will be a conti∣nued declaration of the sins that they were guilty of, as also the following words are. But I see no reason why we should forsake the first mentioned Expositions, and their ren∣dring to follow his. Mean while that the word may suggest different notions, we may learn from a note that we find in that Arabick MS Version done by a Jew, and elsewhere men∣tioned; which note is, that the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hannach lo, admit of four Expositions: The first of which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Let him alone to do what he will. The second, that it be the Infinitive mood, in the signification of g 1.16 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 settling, resting, or reposing, as much as to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He hath fixed or settled himself to (or for) his Calf in his habitation (or at home,) so taking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lo, him or to him, to be referred to his Idol, on whose worship he hath settled himself, and wholly addicted himself to it, and will not go up to Jerusalem to worship God. So I take to be the meaning of his words. The third, in the meaning of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 leaving, so as to de∣note, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God hath left him (or shall leave him) in the hand of the enemy, (or God hath made him empty or desolate by the hand of the enemy.) The fourth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The leaving or deserting of the worship or ser∣vice of God; so as to sound, he hath left him, or by leaving him, i. e. God. Among these he seems to prefer the first; for that he puts in his Translation, rendring the verse, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim is joyned to Idols, therefore leave him, or let him alone. This is that which we find from the Jewish Commentators, any way tending to the lite∣ral exposition of these words.

There is another application rather than exposition of them, which we have from an h 1.17 ancient Doctor among them, who thence taking an argument for the commendation of peace and unity, would have them to found, Ephraim being joyned to Idols, or one to another among themselves in the worship of Idols, let them alone: while they are even in this evil way unanimous, there is no prevailing over them. This Abarbinel mentions, but without any expression of liking or dislike to it. But R. Tanchum, though not reciting it, seems to give an oblique censure of it, while speaking of these words he gives the Reader a caution, that for his part he explains the words ac∣cording to the sound of the letter, and what agrees with the antecedence and consequence, to which he saith the Allegorical explication of some learned men is not prejudicial; in as much, as according to a known rule, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The letter is one way by it self, and the Allegorical exposition (or descant) another by it self. What is this less than to say, that that way of exposition is to no pur∣pose, as to the understanding of the words? Nor do we for any other end mention it, then that it may be taken notice of, That as by their literal expositions we may be holpen in the understanding of the words, so from their Allegorical, or like explications, we may not always expect it, they being often very ex∣travagant, and wide from the scope of the matter, as manifestly here.

Notes

• r 1.1

  Socius Idolorum. Interlin. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 MS. Ar.
• s 1.2

  Vulg. Lat. LXXII. Syr. Ar.
• t 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abu Walid. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Tanchum.
• v 1.4

  Tigur.
• * 1.5

  Calv. Zanch. Vat. Ar. Mont. Dras. Petr. à Fig.
• w 1.6

  Lively.
• x 1.7

  And c. 11.14. and 14.11.
• y 1.8

  So Abarbinel reads it.
• z 1.9

  Jerome. Lyra. Mont. Ribera. Sa. Merc. Jun. Trem. Tarnov. Diodati. Grot.
• a 1.10

  Rivet. Tarnov.
• b 1.11

  Metc. Petr. à Fig. Pisc.
• c 1.12

  Mercer to the same sense, cultu relicto.
• d 1.13

  Crit. sacra. l. 5. c. 2.
• e 1.14

  Vindic. part. 2. c. 10.
• f 1.15

  As the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth also signifie, to place to put, as well as to suffer, permit, or leave.
• g 1.16

  So Abu Walid gives to the root the signification of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 leaving, letting alone, settling.
• h 1.17

  S••e Yalkat.