A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

v. 6. My people are destroyed (or, as in the Margin, cut off) for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no Priest to me; seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

My people, viz. Israel, whom he former∣ly chose for a people to himself, and had given his laws to. (The calling them so, much aggravates their ingratitude, and the igno∣rance they are accused of, which in them, his people, must needs be voluntary and con∣tracted,) are destroyed, or cut off. The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nidmu, are destroyed, is the same in the Passive voice that was in the former verse used in the Active, and rendred, I will destroy. It is put in the plural number, because the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Am, people, though it be of the singular number, is a Noun of multitude; so ours, my people are, not, my people is. They who in the former verse, render the Verb in another signification, so do likewise here: so the Greek, Thy mother is likened to one that hath not knowledge; with whom agrees the printed Arabic. The ancient Latin, My people i 1.1 have held their peace, because they had not knowledge. So the Syriack, My people hath been silent, be∣cause there is in them no knowledge; and the Manuscript Arabick, So that my people hath been made silent for lack of knowledge: to which

agree k 1.2 some Latin, Ad silentium redactus est populus meus, My people is put to silence. The Chaldee, My people are become l 1.3 brutish (or foolish) without (or for lack of) knowledge.

Abarbinel, that he may give here a notion of the word something like to what he gave before, which was the notion of likeness, would have the meaning to be, That the people were given to fancies and imaginations, and fol∣lowed after Soothsayers or Diviners, and Ido∣latries, for want of true knowledge and judg∣ment, which is usually weak where Phantasy prevaileth. But this seems a Phantasie of his own, and that a wide one: But as in the for∣mer verse we saw no reason to follow any of those wayes, as to the signification of the word, so neither do we here; but think that the best, which ours, agreeably to many others both of Jews and Christians, give, which is the notion of destruction, cutting off, or perishing.

In the first verse he complaineth of them, and saith, he hath a controversie with them, because there is no knowledge of God in the land. What mischief is by that want of knowledge brought upon them, is here declared, they are cut off, destroyed, or perish; knowledge being to a man as the life of his soul, true life, eter∣nal life, according to what our Saviour saith, This is life eternal, that they might know thee, &c. Jo. 17.3. for lack of knowledge they are destroyed, made ready for destruction, and shall be destroyed, as some put one tense, some another, and the word is capable to be ren∣dred by either, or the Preterperfect-tense al∣so, as the sense may seem most to require, and is therefore by different Interpreters so diffe∣rently rendred, though they all mean, and all tend to the same thing, viz. to shew m 1.4 the certainty of the thing, that though not yet done, it was as sure to be done, as if it were at present in doing, or had been already done. So will it be to be understood, whither we say, n 1.5 pereunt, do perish, or are destroyed, or o 1.6 exscin∣dentur, shall be cut off, or p 1.7 succisus est, or q 1.8 excisus est, hath been cut off, all will import, that surely and suddenly it shall be so with them, because they are without knowledge, and that willingly: So that ignorance is not to them an excuse for, but an aggravation of, their sin.

How great a sin such ignorance, in matters concerning what is to be known of God, and his will, and wayes, is, and how God is provo∣ked thereby, appears by what is said Is. 5.13. Therefore my people are gone into captivity, be∣cause they have no knowledge, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mib∣beli daat; the same words which are here, and rendred, for lack of knowledge, and literally sound, for, or from, without knowledge, i. e. for being without knowledge.

How guilty the people here spoken to were in that kind, and what evil was thereby brought on them, as it appears in the present words that we have seen, so is farther decla∣red in the following, Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no Priest to me; wherein are expres∣sed the cause of their want of knowledge, and the punishment for that cause brought on them. They lack knowledge, not because they wanted opportunity, or means of obtain∣ing it, but because they rejected it; the punish∣ment threatned to them for it, is, that therefore he will reject them from being Priest•• unto him.

The change of the person in the second clause from what is in the first, (it being in the first, my people, in the second, thou,) makes it inquirable, who is in the one, and the other spoken of, and to. In the first, the whole people seems spoken of; in the second, some more particularly spoken to, which whether it be still the people, or particularly the Priests, one of them, or all of them, may be que∣stioned. Change of persons in a r 1.9 continued speech is not unusual in the Scriptures; as elsewhere, so in this Prophet, though the same or else divers be spoken of, s 1.10 and it hath weight in it. There be therefore, who would have t 1.11 all these things in this verse spoken of the people, called in the first clause, my people; others, v 1.12 that as in that clause the people in general are spoken of, so in this next, the Priests are spoken to; and then a∣gain, in the following words, some think the speech directed again to the people, w 1.13 others that it is continued to the Priest, till v. 12. They that look on all as directed to the peo∣ple, x 1.14 have this ground, That though here be mention of the Priesthood, and things per∣taining to that office, yet that may well enough be appliable to the whole people, which might be all said to be Priests to God: for so it is said of the whole Nation, Ye shall be to me a kingdom of Priests, Exod. 19.6. so that in them all, so much of the Priests office, as to have knowledge of God and his law, was required. Of them all was it required, that the words which God commanded them, should be in their heart; and that they should teaoh them diligently unto their children, and should talk of them when they sate in their houses, and when they walked by the way, and when they lay down, and when they rose up; and that they should bind them for a sign upon their hand; and they should be as frontlets between their eyes; and

they should write them upon the posts of their house, and on their gates Deut. 6.6, 7, 8, 9. and again, c. 11.10. &c. So that in them, any of them, to be without knowledge of God, and his laws, was plainly a neglect and breach of his command; and to reject it, and to forget the law, for their due remembrance of which such caution was given, and such care taken, must needs be a great fault, and which he might well threaten severely to punish. Yet do y 1.15 others, the most, think, that the words are so ordered as peculiarly to respect the Priest, who was properly in that office; by whose ignorance in the law, or want of teaching it to the people, it is probable that ignorance which should bring destruction on them, did overspread them; for it was his duty to teach them, according to what is said, They shall teach Jacob thy judgments, and Israel thy law, Deut. 33.10. and, the Priests lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth. M••l 2.7. A••d therefore having men∣tioned the peoples lack of knowledge, and what should befall them by that means, well might he turn his speech to the Priest or Priests as the cause of it through his or their ignorance or neglect, and so doubly guilty, for his own ignorance, and the ignorance of the people, which should have been better taught by him, and worthy, in the first place, of punishment, even more than the people.

But then if it be spoken to the Priest, will it be subject to farther enquiry, what Priest is spoken to, and whether one or more, the whole order; and whether illegal, or legal Priests. For, the present Prophecy peculiar∣ly concerning the ten Tribes, we know that at first, after their rent from the two, they had no lawful Priests. It is said of Jeroboam that made the breach, that he made Priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi, 1 Kin. 12.31. and that he and his sons cast off the Levites from executing the Priests office, and ordained them Priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the Calves which he had made. 2 Chr. 11.14, 19. And it is probable, that they continued to make such Priests; we do not read that they changed their custom; yet it is withall probable, that in time many of the sons of Levi, or z 1.16 such as were capable of legal Priesthood, might turn again to them, and live and perform such office among them; yet so as to embrace their idolatrous ways, rejecting and forgetting the law of God; and a 1.17 these some think spoken to. Even the former of these may be called Priests, because though they were not legally so, yet they pretended so to be, and b 1.18 having taken on them the title, and office, and profession of Priests to God, ought to have performed the duty of studying the Law, and teaching it, and by not doing so were guilty of this also, and deserved for it the punishment threat∣ned.

Kimchi, (besides what we have seen of Aben Ezra's opinion on the former verse to that purpose) without making distinction, saith, that he speaks to the Priest that was in that time. c 1.19 Others distinctly, that it is to the Tribe of Levi, particularly. And among those that look on it as spoken to the Priests, though because it is said, Thou, as to a single person, it be therefore by d 1.20 some thought to be directed to the chief among them particu∣larly, yet is it by e 1.21 others thought to be di∣rected to the whole order of them, and so e∣very f 1.22 particular among them. But after this diversity of opinions, considering the words, I think it may not be unsit without nicety in parting them between people and Priest, al∣lotting them distinctly their parts, to say of the whole as a g 1.23 grave Interpreter doth, that they may be referred either to the people, or Priests, (though perhaps more to the Priests, in whom greater measure of knowledge was required.) It will appear, that both were guilty of the fault objected, and the punish∣ment threatned, such as should, and did, seize on both.

Mean while it is very observable, how the sin and the punishment run parallel, and are proportioned one to the other. The crimes objected are, that they rejected knowledge, and that they forgat the law of their God: The punishment proportioned to the first, that he also would reject them, that they should be no Priests to him; to the second, that he would also forget their children. That by the know∣ledge which they are said to reject, is not meant onely a speculative knowledge, but a practick; not onely a knowing the letter or sense of the law, in which they were taught what was necessarily to be known of him, and his will, and wayes, but their framing their lives and actions according to what was taught, that they might be worthy of him, and agreeable to his will therein revealed, is ma∣nifest. For the end of his giving his laws and commandments to them, was, that they might so know them, as to keep and do them; that was reckoned their wisdom and under∣standing, Deut. 4.6. and the doing according to his commandments, doth he declare to be the knowledge of him. Jer: 2.16. Some therefore have thought it convenient to ex∣pound knowledge by h 1.24 pietatem, godliness; and

if that be not so comprehensive as the word knowledge, yet sure we cannot but think it to be included in it, it comprehending both the knowing what ought to be done, and the observing to do it according to that knowledge. And either the neglecting to get a right know∣ledge of God and his will, where means for attaining it is offered and to be had, as it was to them who had from of old Moses, and afterwards Prophets sent to admonish them to look into his law; or else the neglect and refusal to make due use of it, and frame their actions according to what they knew to be Gods will and command, may deservedly be call'd a rejecting of knowledge: so in any of the people which had that means, much more in the Priests, whose office was not onely to know the law themselves, but to instruct the people, both by their doctrine according to the truth of the law, and the example of their life framed according to the rules thereof.

As to the punishment threatned for such rejecting of knowledge, if it be taken as con∣cerning the people in general, then the mea∣ning of his saying, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no Priest to me, which is given by i 1.25 those who take that way, is, that he threatens to deprive them of all form of re∣ligion, and outward profession of worship and face of a Church, and priviledges any way belonging to it, to which the office of Priesthood was so necessary, as that the taking away of that would be the abolishing of the whole, as may be collected by what is said, Heb. 17.12. that where there is a change of the Priesthood, there is of necessity a change also of the law, and so the abolition of the one imports the abolition of the other, and it may sound as k 1.26 some will, that he will not leave any Priest among them: Or we may say, if we follow them, that it is a threat of taking away from them that priviledge of being, as in the law he promised (as we have seen) that they should be, a Kingdom of Priests unto him. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Miccahen li, ren∣dred, that thou shalt be no Priest to me, or lite∣rally, from being a Priest to me, is of that la∣titude, as not onely to denote (as we have formerly observed to that purpose) the be∣ing a Priest, or performing the office of a Priest, properly and strictly so call'd, but more largely to perform l 1.27 any Ministry or service, whoever it were that peformed it, whether to the true God, or others. And so doth the Chaldee here render it by a word of the same latitude, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mil∣leshamasha kodomai, from ministring before me; which last word, before me, in the Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to me, shews the service here, whether by Priest, or other, to be meant of such as was pretended to be done to God, and doth not as * 1.28 some think it doth, belong onely to the true and legal Priesthood, &c. This, I say, is that which is to be sayd, if the words be taken as directed to the people in general; but if they be looked on as concerning par∣ticularly the Priests, whether the chief of them especially, or the whole order of them, such as pretended to be such, and were re∣puted for such, and executed the office; the meaning will be, that he will deprive them of that office, and their m 1.29 pretence to it, spoil them of that dignity, that they shall not lon∣ger retain it, or go for Priests to him; he will, he saith, reject them, not acknowledging them for such, and by such means as he shall see fit, whether by n 1.30 death, exile, or other∣wise, cutting them off from it, make it mani∣fest that they are not such as he delights in, or are in esteem with him: which how it was brought to pass on them, is manifest by the dispersing them in the captivity, not long after brought on them and their Nation, and cau∣sing the whole way of their worship to cease. It is here observable, that the word rendred, I will reject, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Emaseca, which is as it were Emaseaca, is of an unusual wri∣ting and form, with a letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a added before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 c, whereas the usual form would be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Emaseca, without it. It is by the Jewish Ex∣positors taken notice of; Kimchi saith, he knows not the reason of it; Abarbinel strives to give a reason of it, and that it is as a com∣pound word, and hath in it the signification of two, viz. of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 E'mas, I will reject, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ac onely, and that the meaning is, I will reject thee onely from being a Priest to me, i. e. so far will I reject thee, but not totally, so as utterly to destroy thee; but this opinion of his seems both groundless, and very im∣pertinent. It is much more probable that it was inserted to give weight and Emphasis to the word, to intend or enforce the significa∣tion thereof, and denote that what is said shall certainly be done, (as in the o 1.31 Arabick tongue addition of letters adds weight to the signification of words, and increaseth it,) and perhaps it might be in those times when the Hebrew tongue flourished, a thing not unu∣sual to use such forms; of which, seeing there occur not more examples in the text of the Bible, which is all that we have now left of the ancient pure Hebrew, Grammarians can∣not give account.

It is farther objected to them, whether the people, as some again here will, or the Priests

more peculiarly, or both together, that they had forgotten the law of the Lord their God. This forgetting the law, we may with some thus distinguish from the rejecting the knowledge thereof, before taxed, in that p 1.32 he may be said to reject the knowledge of the law, that re∣fuseth at all to learn it; but he to forget it, that hath learned or looked into it, but re∣members it not, nor takes care to understand it, and observe what is taught in it, and make it the rule of his life to do accordingly; and so by continuing in sinful courses, and neg∣lect of the duties in the law commanded, suffers it clean again to be blotted out of his mind and memory. q 1.33 By any of these ways may men be said to forget the law of God; and if it be looked on as spoken of the Priest, then as well his neglecting to teach it to the people, as his not expressing it in his own practice, may be well call'd a forgetting of it; his forgetting 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to learn it, and to teach it, as Kimchi speaks.

The punishment proportioned to this sin is, I will also forget thy children: It is that which is both by r 1.34 Jewish and Christian Ex∣positors so understood. And it is very appa∣rent, that God speaks here of himself in the language of men, or assimilation to them: for God cannot be properly said to forget, but when he subtracts his care and provi∣dence from men, and looks not after them for good, is he said to forget them: as when men look not after a thing which might pertain to them, or take not care of it, it is a sign they have forgotten it, and they are said so to have done. He saith, I will forget thy children. If it be spoken of the whole Nation, it will in∣clude them, and their posterity, that he will no more own them for his people. s 1.35 Them collectively, we have seen called the mother, and as in several, the children; they then and their posterity may be comprehended under this notion, and his delivering them up to captivity, and giving them up into the hand of their enemies to prevail over them, will be his forgetting them; wherein his proceed∣ing appears to be most just: They first t 1.36 for∣get the covenant, whereby they were inga∣ged to him, and break it; justly then he, pro∣voked by their unfaithful dealing, will not look on them longer as the people of his covenant, but forget (as it were) the in∣gagements to them on his part made, on con∣dition that they should keep covenant with him. Thou hast forgotten, therefore I will for∣get; they first; he after the breach is made on their parts. But his saying, that he will for∣get them, is a sign that he doth remember them; his forgetting of them for good, a re∣membring them for evil.

If it be looked on as spoken peculiarly to the Priests, then by their children may be meant, either the people who were as it were their u 1.37 spiritual children, who were by them to be fed with the milk of the law, to be nurtur'd and brought up by them in the nurture and fear of the Lord, and then his forgetting them will be as we have before said; or else their natural children, and then the sorget∣ting them will be depriving them of that fun∣ction, and cutting them off from succeeding their fathers in it according to custom, or de∣stroying them. So Kimchi;

Thou shalt die; for I have rejected thee that thou shalt be no Priest to me; moreover, I will forget thy children, and reject them, that they shall not succeed in thy place, and that there shall not be to them the dignity of the Priesthood: they shall either die, or go into banishment. And the word, forget, is spoken by way of likeness, as when a man forgets a thing, and sets not his heart on it; as in like manner it is used Ps. 77.9. Hath God forgotten to be gracious? and Deut. 4.31.

He will not forget the covenant of thy fathers. The Chaldee here renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will far remove (or put away, or reject) thy sons.

Notes

• i 1.1

  Doway Translat.
• k 1.2

  Tigur.
• l 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• m 1.4

  Tarnov
• n 1.5

  Cast.
• o 1.6

  Jun. Trem. Grot.
• p 1.7

  Munst.
• q 1.8

  Drus.
• r 1.9

  Zanch.
• s 1.10

  Mutata per∣sona pondus addit orationi. Brenn.
• t 1.11

  Ribera thinks the vulg. Lat. so to do, because it reads, oblita, in the foem. gend. which must agree with synagoga, or congregatio, as Chr. à Castro.
• v 1.12

  Zanch.
• w 1.13

  Rivet.
• x 1.14

  See R. Tanch.
• y 1.15

  Pagnin inser••s it in his version, O sacerdos, O priest; and R. Tanchum takes it peculiarly to respect the Tribe of Levi, who had charge of dispensing the law.
• z 1.16

  Pareus.
• a 1.17

  See Chr, à Castro.
• b 1.18

  Gr••t.
• c 1.19

  R. Tanchum.
• d 1.20

  Ab. Ezra. on v. 5. and R. Ta••ch. there cites such as so said.
• e 1.21

  Rivet.
• f 1.22

  Grot.
• g 1.23

  Oecolamp. Potes referre ad populum vel Sacerdotes.
• h 1.24

  Grot.
• i 1.25

  See Ribera. Chr. à Castro. Tirin.
• k 1.26

  Petr. à Fig.
• l 1.27

  See 2 Sam. 8.18. 2 Chr. 14, 15. r.
• * 1.28

  Chr. à Castro.
• m 1.29

  Grot.
• n 1.30

  Bren. Sacerdotio dejectos mort••, vel exilio, & captivitatimancipabo.
• o 1.31

  And compare with it Nun paragogicum in the future.
• p 1.32

  Abarb. Haec distingui possunt h••c modo, ut rejectio scientiae theoriam spectaverit; legis autem oblivio, pra∣xin in ctionib sv tae. Rivet.
• q 1.33

  Petr. à Fig.
• r 1.34

  Abarb. Petr. à Fig. &c.
• s 1.35

  Petr. à Fig.
• t 1.36

  Petr. à Fig. Zanch.
• u 1.37

  Ar Mont. Rivet. See Chr. à Castro.