A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

CHAPTER VIII.

V. 1. Set the trumpet to thy mouth, [Marg. Heb. to the roof of thy mouth:] he shall come as an eagle against the house of the Lord, because they have transgressed my covenant, and tres∣passed against my law.

THE words are here very concise in the Hebrew, being only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El chicceca shophar canne∣sher al beit Jehovah, To thy palat a trumpet as an eagle against (or over) the house of the Lord; Which, though if so literally rendred, they may (as a a 1.1 learned man observes) have greater Emphasis in them, and be a sign of greater passion, yet for the explaining the meaning, require some supplies to be made, the assigning of which together with the rea∣sons, as the different distinguishing of the parts of the sentence, and a different apply∣ing and so giving the meaning of some of the words, though not otherwise of ambigu∣ous signification in themselves, arising from the same grounds, hath given occasion of no small variety of Expositions, as by a par∣ticular view of the words in order will ap∣pear. First then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El chicceca shophar, To thy mouth (or palat) the (or a) trumpet. That the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chec properly signifies the palat, the ordinary use of it else∣where in Scripture makes unquestionable. To it in the same signification, and so as toge∣ther to comprehend that part of the mouth under it, is answerable in the Syriac tongne 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Checo, as also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chenco, with the letter N inserted in the midst, as like∣wise in the Arabick, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hanac.

Why this is named, whereas a trumpet is put to the mouth, not into it so far as to the palat, b 1.2 some give the reason, that it is to de∣note eagerness and hast in sounding it; as if he that is bid to blow were, as soon as he could, to meet the sound, and not delay till it should come to the lips. Which likewise may be said of the author of the Vulgar Latins translating it, in gutture tuo, in thy throat. But there is no need of such nicety, as to take the word in its proper signification of the palat; but it being a part of the mouth, and, as the throat also, an instrument of forming the sound or voice to be uttered by the mouth, it may well be taken by an ordinary c 1.3 figure for the whole mouth, and is well so by ours translated.

But this makes no considerable matter of difference; but there being joyned to this Noun an affix of the second person, thy mouth, and the word or Noun, trumpet, immediately joyned to it without any Verb between them, requires some things necessarily to be under∣stood for giving us the meaning; as namely the persons to whom this is spoken, and by whom, and whose mouth it is, and what he is bid to do to his mouth, and with that trum∣pet. As for the person speaking, of that is no doubt to be made, but that it is God spea∣king to the Prophet, and giving him com∣mands; or else the Prophet speaking in Gods name to some others. To which of them to ascribe what is spoken, we shall better judg when we see who it is that is spoken to, and what he is bid to do. And here is difference between Expositors, first in supplying the person spoken to, or called on; the Prophet, say some, and they the most, as if God said, Thou, O Prophet; others the people, as if the Prophet said, Thou, (or ye) O people: The Enemy, say others, as if either God, or the Prophet in his name should say, Thou, O ene∣my, the trumpet to thy mouth. Then secondly, that we may know what by this the person spoken to, according to either of these ways, is required to do with his mouth, and with the trumpet, it is necessary farther to under∣stand and supply some Verb, which may ei∣ther govern the Noun, Trumpet, or be gover∣ned by it; and both ways are taken. They that take the first, and make that Noun the Ac∣cusative

case, supply, as ours do, the Verb, set, put, or apply, or something equivalent, set to thy mouth the trumpet, and then will be understood also, and say, or proclaim, which some think fit therefore expresly to supply; as Junius and Tremellius, Adhibita palato tuo buccina, dicito, A trumpet being set to thy palat, or, setting a trumpet to thy mouth, say thou.

They who make the Noun, Trumpet, to be the Nominative case, and to govern that Verb, understanding, Sit, let be, or the like, give but the same meaning; as the Vulgar Latin, In gutture tuo sit tuba, let a trumpet be in thy throat, or, as d 1.4 another, Ad palatum tuum buccina (supple) adsit, let the trumpet be pre∣sent (or, set to) thy palat.

Taking then the person spoken to, accor∣ding to the first of the forementioned ways, for the Prophet called upon by God, and what is spoken to him with the supply of the men∣tioned Verbs, we are given to understand by them, That God bids the Prophet to set a trumpet to his mouth, and loudly to pro∣claim what follows. In this expression, to thy mouth the trumpet, is a manifest allusion to such custom of calling together the people, or war∣ning them to attend, and proclaiming to them something which was of concernment to them to be aware and heedful of; as of the coming of an enemy, or the like imminent danger, as appears, Ezek. 33.3. Amos 3.6. and above c. 5.8. and e 1.5 elsewhere. It could not but have startled them to have seen the Prophet with a trumpet at his mouth, and with his fullest brea••h sounding it, to command their at∣tention; they must needs have looked on it as a sign of some great matter, and of present concernment to them. Yet is it not necessary to think f 1.6 that the Prophet was really to take to himself a trumpet, and set it to his mouth and sound it, but rather that he should ear∣nestly and with all contention call upon them, that so his voice and words might have the same effect on them, as the sound of a trum∣pet would have upon men; that he should loudly and earnestly call upon them, accor∣ding to that, Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, Is. 58.1. and to that pur∣pose is it by the Chaldee rendred, O Prophet cry aloud with thy palat, as with a trumpet, say, &c. So by the Syriac Translator, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let thy mouth be as a trumpet. Now according to this way, these words con∣tain Gods command to the Prophet for ut∣tering what he should utter, and his direction concerning the manner how he should utter it, publickly and loudly; and then the next words, distinguished from them, the matter, or that which he should utter, or, which is all one, the reason why he did utter them, and why they ought to attend to him, viz. as an eagle against the house of the Lord.

That is as much as according to the letter the words sound, for the making plain of which, there will here again be necessarily re∣quired other supplies. Ours therefore, with others that follow the same way in distinguish∣ing the words, before the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Canne∣sher, as an eagle, supply, he shall come, or, doth come or flie. But who then is that He pointed out? g 1.7 the enemie: so in the general term will the most concur; and h 1.8 some express it in their translations; or i 1.9 war. But in assigning par∣ticularly that enemy who he is, or by whom that war should be made, they are not of the same opinion. A King, saith the Chaldee, like an eagle that flieth, shall come up with his ar∣my, and pitch against the house of the sanctuary of God. But what King? Nebuchadnezzar, say k 1.10 some, with his Chaldeans; others, the King of l 1.11 Assyria with his armies, and he Senacherib, as m 1.12 some, or Salmanaser, as n 1.13 others. He not being expressed by name in the text, to which of those opinions there is most reason to ad∣here, and what exposition to follow, we shall the better judge by seeing first, what is meant in the next words by the house of the Lord, a∣gainst which he is to come.

The house of the Lord, is a proper and usual title for the Temple at Jerusalem, under that notion at first built and consecrated by Salomon, and owned by God himself, and after all along so called by God and men, and of that there∣fore is it by o 1.14 divers here understood; and be∣cause that house stood in Jerusalem, therefore think this Prophecy directed against p 1.15 Jerusa∣lem and q 1.16 Judah, at least r 1.17 against them toge∣ther with Israel and the ten tribes, and so to be understood, in the first way, Nebuchadnez∣zar King of Ba••ylon, who in Zedekiah's time coming with his armies took Jerusalem, and burnt the house of the Lord, and the Kings house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, &c. 2 Ki. 25.9. and they think this confirmed by that under the s 1.18 notion of a great eagle with great wings, &c. coming to Lebanon, is set forth the King of Babylon's coming to Jerusalem, Ezek. 17.12. But this pleaseth not t 1.19 others, in as much as on consideration of the following ver∣ses together with this, they think it manifest that what is denounced concerns rather Israel than Judah, and therefore the words ought

not be understood of that which concerned only Judah, as Nebuchadnezzar's coming did, whereas the Kingdom of Israel had been before destroyed. We may add, that what the Prophet here denounceth seems to be a thing of speedier execution, expressed by the swift flying of the Eagle, than that destruction of the temple was. Others therefore, as we said, rather understand the Assyrian, or some King of Assyria with his forces, from whom Israel did more suffer; and because by the house of the Lord, they understand the Tem∣ple at Jerusalem, such a one they suppose to be meant, who in some way bent himself against that also, and did extend his force, at least his terror, even so far as the Jews in Jerusalem; and v 1.20 some will have him to be Se∣nacherib, who after that Salmanaser had car∣ried the ten Tribes captive, brought up his forces against all the defenced cities of Judah, and took them also, and sent defiance to Je∣rusalem also by Tartan, and Rabsaris, and Rab∣shakeh; yet did he not take it, nor prevail to do hurt to the Temple, God wonderfully pre∣venting his intended mischief against it by de∣stroying his armies by an Angel: so that this being a Prophecy of evil to be executed by Gods command on those against whom it is denounced, and against the house of the Lord, and not only a rehersal of vain and issuless threats of an insolent enemy, cannot be said by what he did to have been fulfilled. A∣gain, what he did was not against Israel, who are looked on as here spoken to and against, for they were before destroyed by his Prede∣cessor Shalmaneser.

Others therefore will rather have it un∣stood of Shalmaneser, and his coming against Israel: but then the objection will be, that he did nothing against the Temple. For answer to which they have to say, That though the Temple of Jerusalem be properly called the house of the Lord, yet it is not necessary that by the house of the Lord, should always be meant the Temple, and therefore is not neces∣sarily here so understood. For the house of the Lord is an appellation that may agree not on∣ly to that material building, but also to the house, or people, or church of Israel them∣selves, in a language not unknown in the Scriptures: as Numb. 12.7. where so long before that Temple was built, God saith of Moses, who is faithful in all mine house; which words are cited also Heb. 3.2. and in like ex∣pression, v. 6. of that chapter, true belie∣vers are called Christs house, as likewise 1 Cor. 3.16, 17. and 2 Cor. 6.16. the temple of the living God, and c. 9.15. of this Prophecy, what God saith he would drive them out of his house, x 1.21 must necessarily, considering the condition Israel was then in, be rather un∣derstood of the land, or Church, or family of Israel, (who were once Gods peculiar, and looked on themselves as still so) than of the Temple at Jerusalem: and the house of the Lord being then so understood, as there is no reason why it should not be, it will be very pro∣per to understand by that enemy that came or should come against that house, even parti∣cularly Shalmaneser, who came against Israel with his Assyrian forces, and destroyed them. For to understand that house of the Lord, as y 1.22 some seem to do, of the Idol-temples among them, to which they blasphemously might perhaps give that name, there is no good reason; though they might so call them, God or his Prophet doubtless would not; but that before it named, I see no reason to ex∣cept against, and look on it as very agreeable to the words as by ours translated, supplied, and distinguished, so as to give us first Gods command to his Prophet, then that which he should by Gods command loudly, as by sound of a trumpet, declare, that the Assyrian enemy should come against them, who were called the house of God, as an eagle, that is, with z 1.23 great speed and violence, like that of that swift to a Proverb, and fierce bird flying at his prey, and hasting to it. So R' Tanch. he denotes thereby 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 speed in falling on, as Jer. 48.40. (besides which, a 1.24 some think, in comparing those Kings to an Eagle, to be an allusion also to their Ensigns, which were an Eagle, as well as afterwards the Romans,) and then will fall in the latter part, as a reason why the enemy is by God sent upon them, and shall so come upon them, viz. because (saith he) they have transgressed my covenant, and trespassed against my law. And that this Exposition may perhaps be found the plainest and most proper among those that we meet with, we shall the better judge by taking notice of some of them.

Others therefore, though they agree so far with this named, as to look on the Prophet as the person spoken to by God, and comman∣ded to speak to the people, yet by their dif∣ference in their supplies, and their distinguish∣ing the words, make both the members of the verse, and the sense also different. Such is 1. that of R. Salomo, who explains it, The di∣vine Majesty saith unto the Prophet, Make the sound of thy palate to be heard, and proclaim (as) with a trumpet, and say, b 1.25 Fly and make hast O enemy as an Eagle flieth, and come to the house w 1.26

of God, wherein is not much difference of sense from the former, but that what in that he is bid to tell them the enemy would do, he is according to this bid to c 1.27 call on him to do; and then the reason why he should so do, follows as in that.

Secondly, that of Aben Ezra, The words of God to the Prophet, set to thy palat a trumpet, and flie as an Eagle against the house of the Lord. So that here is no supply of, say to them, or, the enemy, nor any distinction of the matter to be declared, from the command for de∣claring. I suppose his meaning will tend to the same purpose, and that by his flying as an eagle against the house of God, he means, that he should denounce speedy judgments to them to be executed by the enemies so com∣ing against them.

Thirdly, that of d 1.28 others, who make that which in the first way was divided, into Gods com∣mand to the prophet for proclaiming what he bad him, and the matter of that procla∣mation, to be only a continued command proscribing the manner of it, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Al, which others render to, or against, by over, or above, as the word also properly signifies; and then what we put according to that first way, as the reason why it should be so to them, (as, according to that reading, it is said it should be) to be the matter or thing which he was so loudly to tell them of; thus, To thy palat, or to the roof of thy mouth a trumpet, as an eagle over the house of the Lord, i. e. Call or cry out aloud, as if a trumpet were set to thy mouth, with a noise shrill and loud like that of an Eagle mounted in the air, and flying above the height of the Tem∣ple, which may be heard a great way off, that they have transgressed my covenant &c. this loudly make known unto them. And so will this command to the Prophet from God agree with that other (as to the first expression of a trumpet) Is. 68.1. Cry aloud, (or with the throat) spare not, lift up thy voice like a trum∣pet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. As to the second expression, by mention of an Eagle mounted on high, and thence crying or uttering his shrill note, they bid us to compare Revel. 8.13. where we read, according to the more usual copies, And I beheld and heard 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an Angel; but in e 1.29 other copies is read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an Eagle, as in the Syriac, and Vulgar Latin also, flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Wo, wo to the inhabitants of the earth. Both expressions together denote a loud proclaiming of that which he is bid to divulge, and to give them to take notice of; which (saith Grotius) is that which he saith, that they have transgressed his covenant, so as in the forecited Is. 58.1. he bids him shew his people their transgression. Or if we insist on the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yaan, rendred, for, then may we understand (as it well may be understood) that his loud cry should be a proclaiming of heavy evils and judgments speedily to come on them, though not particularly expressed; and these words will be still a reason why they are denounced against them, viz. for (or be∣cause) they transgressed his covenant. Both ways come to one pass.

With this exposition may well agree the Vulgar Latin, In gutture tuo sit tuba quasi aquila super domum Domini pro eo quod transgressi sunt, and more the Syriac, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let thy mouth be as a trumpet, and as an eagle over the house of the Lord, because they have transgressed my covenant. This exposition hath this in it, that it takes away all necessity of questioning what is meant by the house of the Lord, taking it for the temple only in respect of its height.

Now all these ways hitherto agree, in that they look on the Prophet as the person spoken to by God; but others, as we said, look on the words as, by God, or his Prophet in his name directed to the people, that so they may sound, Thou, O Israel, set thy trumpet to thy mouth, for behold the enemy which shall flee as an eagle to, or against, the house of the Lord; as much as to say, he shall come 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Al, against, the whole land, even to or against the house of the Lord, to lay it wast, because they have transgressed my covenant, &c. This is Kimchi's way, which he justifieth by comparing these words with those above, c. 5.8. Blow ye the cornet in Gi∣beah, the trumpet in Ramah, cry aloud &c. viz. to assemble your selves for receiving the ene∣my, which approacheth; and to take away exceptions, because they are there spoken to in the plural, here in the singular, thy mouth, or palat, or roof of thy mouth, he saith, that when God or any Prophet speaketh to the people, he speaketh to them sometimes in the singular number, sometimes in the plu∣ral: and thus differing from the former ways in respect of the person spoken to, as to what is spoken he agreeth with the first way.

There remaineth yet f 1.30 another way, in in which the person spoken to is taken for the Enemy, Thou O enemy, set to thy mouth a

trumpet, and sound an alarm, and as an eagle swiftly fly against and set on the house of the Lord, so making the words so far a command and direction to the enemy whom God would imploy as the executioner of his judgments against Israel, provoked by their rebellion against him, in the next words mentioned.

Now in all these ways, however they differ in expounding and distinguishing the words, yet is no question at all made concerning the reading of them in the Original Hebrew, nor concerning the signification of them; but in the Greek is found such confusion in this place, as makes some suspect that they read otherwise therein than we now do, and such as makes it not well feisible to find out what they read, and what they meant, and besides their copies are much different between them∣selves. g 1.31 In some copies we find only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Into their bo∣som as earth, as an eagle over the house of God; in h 1.32 several others, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, As impassable ground, as a fox, as an eagle. Locus hujusmodi ut de eo restituendo frustra cogi∣tet, cui subsidium à MS. nullum est, saith Dru∣sius of it, Such a place as that in vain any shall think to restore it to rights, who hath not the help of some Manuscript copie. But I do not find that any hath by the help of such yet done it to any purpose; for though in some copies some of the words (as at first we said) be left out, yet are those that are left such, as made St. Jerom long since to censure them for such, as, Incertum est quid significet, it is uncertain what it should signifie, none might well guess what they meant, and therefore thought it the best way passing them by to follow veri∣tatem Hebraicam, the Hebrew truth, as the other Greek Versions, besides the LXX, he observes to do. St. Cyril (who joyns with them in one sentence, the last words of the preceding chapter,) conceiving in them the same difficulty, and thinking that they had precisely followed the Hebrew, seems to cast the fault upon that, saving, that these things are here spoken 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, very ob∣scurely, and that, as he thought, by reason of that difficulty which the Interpreters found in the Hebrew, which he supposeth then that they did or ought to have followed. But in∣deed the obscurity ariseth not from their fol∣lowing that, but from their not following it; for there is not one word in them as to the former words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, accor∣ding to some copies, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, according to others, which answers in signification to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El chicceca shophar, to the roof of thy mouth a trumpet, for expressing of which they seem all brought. How it should come to pass that in so many words, and of so different significations, they should express it, may seem strange. It is by i 1.33 some said, they did read otherwise then now we find; that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chic∣ceca, thy palat, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chec, they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(or rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chek, which signifies, a bosom; besides their changing the affixe of the second person 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ca, thine, to the third and plural 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 M, theirs; and then instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shophar, a trumpet, read k 1.34 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, dust, prefixing something that may signifie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ca, as if it were, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El chekam caaphar, to their bosom as dust.

But strange it were, that whereas all the other Greek Interpreters, as Aquila, Symma∣chus, Theodotion, according to what Jerom ob∣serves, do read and render as the Hebrew now hath it, only the LXX should have a copy in which it was otherwise; besides that that reading would not make any sense agreeable to this place and matter. But supposing that they did read, as these learned men imagine they did, this will do but little to the business; for there remains still an account to be given for the other words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifies, inaccessible, and, as a fox: how come these in? what is there to answer to them in the Hebrew, where are only those two words before mentioned? of this they being silent, must needs leave us unsatisfied, and I think no good satisfaction can be given. Yet see∣ing other take liberty of conjecturing, if I also may have leave to speak 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (as Cyril there also speaks of his own interpreta∣tion, which is, that the Assyrian should come up∣on them with innumerable forces, as if it were the whole earth or world,) that which comes into my mind, without positive asserting it; I should think it not improbable that in the Hebrew copy, which the author or authors of that Greek translation had, those two words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chicceca shophar, were either by moths, or age, or some other accident so eaten, worn, or rased out, that they could not see any more than some blind vestigia or parts of the letters, and therefore fell to con∣jecturing what might be there written, and thought the first word might be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chekan, and rendred it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; but for the second, not finding any one conjecture that they could rely on, put more: As first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aphar, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Caaphar, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the earth. Secondly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ophel, which may well e∣nough be rendred, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, l 1.35 signifying a steep place, hard of ascent, or of difficult access by reason of its height and roughness, and so

rendred by them elsewhere, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, locus in∣accessus. Thirdly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shual, which is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a fox.

It could not be that in that space of the two words, worn, or eaten, or blotted out, there should be enough in the Hebrew copy, to require by all these words in Greek to be translated, and therefore do we look on them as three several conjectures in the way that we have mentioned; whether of the same person, as not satisfying himself with any one of them, or of different persons, which being all written down by them in the copy of their translation either in the margin or otherwise, might be all huddled together by some Scribe, and go for one translation of those two words; for the rest that follow, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. answer to what is found in the Hebrew.

The cause then of that difference of the LXX from other Versions will be, not that it was written otherwise in their copy than in others, but because they could not discern what had been written in it. And that some of the ancient copies had in them some words so worn out, and made not legible by age or other accident, I think may be proved from that in several places there are found only vowels, and the letters written only in the margin, and read with those vowels as con∣gruous to be read with them; which is a sign that the letters were worn out in the copy which they followed, and m 1.36 only the vowels left, and they would put in the text only what they found. If this had been a novel thing, they would rather have put the letters than the vowels in the text: which seems therefore, together, an argument to prove that the ancient copies were written with vowels. This is the most probable conje∣cture which I can make, which if it satisfie not, I leave the Reader, if he think it worth while, to enquire after some better. Mean while there being not any of these Greek readings, or all together, which seem to make any clear meaning, or convenient to the scope of the place, it will be our safest way, after St. Jerom's example, to cleave to the truth of the Hebrew.

And so pass we on to the latter clause of the verse, which contains a reason why those evils, which the words proclaim against them, should seize upon them, and so declares the justice of God in his proceedings against them. For so, though his justice is always unquestionable, yet doth he use to make known and clear to men the reasonableness of it; the words are. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yaan aberu beriti veal torati pashau, Because they have transgressed my co∣venant, and trespassed against my law.

They, saith Kimchi, first forsook that, therefore will I forsake them, and deliver them up in∣to the hand of strangers, viz.

in recompence of their false and evil dealing with him, as the MS. Arab. renders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And to thy palat a trumpet, as an eagle to the house of the Lord, in recompence for that they transgressed my covenant, and rebelled against my law. Concerning the n 1.37 signification of the words, the generality of Intepreters agree, and the Greek also with the rest, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Because they have transgressed my testimony, and done wickedly against my law. Nor do they differ concerning the meaning, as an accusation of them for transgression and breach of the covenant which he made with their forefathers, and their seed, that he would be to them a God, and they should be to him a peculiar people; and of that law in which was declared, that they might not be ignorant thereof, what things they ought to observe, that that covenant might be rati∣fied and preserved to, and by, them. Only Lyra restrains the covenant here mentioned to that particular covenant made by Zedekiah with Nebuchadnezzar, to whom he had sworn by God 2 Chr. 36.13. which God therefore calleth his oath and his covenant, o 1.38 Ezek. 17.19. and threatneth severely to revenge on him the breach thereof. But p 1.39 it is the people that are here taxed, not the King; and what hath been before said against the understand∣ing what is said in the foregoing words of Nebuchadnezzar, and the destruction of Je∣rusalem, sheweth, that he doth not apply it to the right story, and I think he is by few, if any, followed in it.

v. 2. Israel shall cry unto me, My God, we know thee.

For connecting these with the former words, we may either look on them with q 1.40 some, as what they shall say, when those evils threat∣ned shall come upon them, for deprecating Gods wrath, and moving his compassion, because they acknowledge him to be their

God, and are his people; or, with r 1.41 others, as an apology for themselves, when they hear those heavy judgments denounced against them, that certainly they deserve not such severe dealing, because they acknowledged him to be their God, and were his Israel; s 1.42 or else a declaration of what they ought to have done for preventing those evils, or to do for removing them. In the first way, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yiz'aku, rendred, they shall cry, must be ren∣dred according to its proper form in the Future tense; in the other it may indifferently be rendred either so, or in the Present tense, as by t 1.43 some it is, clamant, do cry, so as to signifie, u 1.44 clamare solent, they use to cry, or else to signifie, they w 1.45 ought to cry, or, x 1.46 clament, let them cry; others will have it to amount to as much as, quamvis me invocant, y 1.47 although they cry unto me.

Concerning the signification of the words there is no difference or difficulty, but from the placing or construction of them there is. The reason of which that we may see, it is to be observed, that the name, Israel, which is in our translation (and others) put in the be∣ginning, is in the Original put in the end of the verse, the last word of all; hence is va∣riety of opinions concerning the construction of it. z 1.48 Many think that here is a transposi∣tion of the words, and that, Israel, which is in the last place, ought in the construction to be transferred to the first, Israel shall cry, &c. a 1.49 Others take it so as to retain its place, in the last member of the verse; We Israel know thee, or, we know thee, we are Israel; so as that that name may seem urged as a proof that they know God, and as an argument to move God to have respect to them, because they are the seed of Jacob, who was called Israel because he prevailed with God, and they by his name called, might have confi∣dence also to prevail with him for his prote∣ction. But what little reason they have to make this a proof or claim of interest in God, and their peculiar owning him, and a reason why they should be as so owned by him, behaving themselves so unworthy of that name as they did, the next verse will shew.

I know not how it comes to pass that some in their translations quite leave out this word, as the Greek, and printed Arabick, and the Syriack. The MS. Arab. supplies before it the name, God, so making it, not so much an appellation of themselves, as an Epither of God, thus rendring, They shall cry unto me, and thus they shall say, O our Lord, now we know thee, O God of Israel; in which, besides this, and the other supply of, they shall say &c. may be noted also a difference, in that he puts the affixe in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabbona, our Lord, in the plural, whereas in the Hebrew it is in the singular, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Elohai, my God, which b 1.50 others make a little scruple or difficulty at, viz. how it comes to pass that that affixe is put in the singular number, whereas the Verbs, referred to the same persons speaking, are in the plural, they shall cry, and, we know, to which, our God, might seem more regu∣larly to agree than, my God: which scruple c 1.51 some take away by expounding it, as if they, that is, every one of them should say, my God. But it is easily answered otherwise also, by observing, (according to that mentio∣ned on the preceding v. out of Kimchi,) that Israel, with like names signifying a people, one body consisting of many members, is in∣differently used, either in the singular, as one, or plural, as more; and so the Verbs and Af∣fixes referred to them, indifferently and fre∣quently are put in either number, sometimes one, sometimes the other. By that whole ren∣dring in Arabic it is manifest, the author thereof understood it of what the Israelites would say, when the denounced judgments seized on them, as if they received instructi∣on, and learned to know God by them, in that he saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Now we have known (or know) thee. The Chaldee, is loo∣ked on as giving a good explication of the words, thus, Whensoever I bring upon them affliction, they pray before me, saying, Now we know that there is no God to us but thee; Redeem us, because we are thy people Israel.

In all these Israel may be taken, as mostly hitherto it hath been, as a distinct Kingdom from Judah, and it seems, for reasons in the former v. mentioned, most convenient that it should be so taken. But Abarbinel takes the different way, and thinks it taken as it is common to both, (as before the division made between them,) and that those, who here it is said shall challenge it to themselves, are they of Judah, addressing themselves to God, and pretending themselves not to be so bad as the ten Tribes, in forsaking God and falling from him, and d 1.52 not crying to him, and who e 1.53 knew him not, and that therefore they hoped or desired that such severe judgments might not fall on them as did on the others. That thus they should do, he thinks the Pro∣phet declares from God; and among Chri∣stian f 1.54 Expositors, Arias Montanus follows him, and seems to think that their doing so as he here says they would do, was a cause of

hindring Senacherib, (who after that his Prede∣cessor Shalmaneser had destroyed Samaria, and carried captive the ten tribes, came with Ea∣gle-like swiftness and violence against Jeru∣salem, and the house of the Lord, the Temple) from accomplishing his design, and so re∣spited Judah from being destroyed so soon as Israel was. Thus they, taking Israel here for that name precious in Gods sight, whereby Judah would ingratiate themselves to him, and move him to have respect to them: but then the Israel, presently subjoyned in the next words, to be taken in its more restrai∣ned notion, for the ten rebellious tribes, who had cast off God, and all that was good (and so are distinguished from Judah who turned unto God) by that their stubborn and wicked behaviour. But I conceive, that considering when, and in respect to what, the Prophet spake, and like circumstances, according to what hath been said on the foregoing v. we shall see no reason to forsake that way, which others generally take, in ascribing that name to the same persons in both verses, viz. Israel of the ten Tribes: and then as this v. shews what they would pretend to do, so will the next shew how false that pretence was, and how bootless like to be to them, in regard that all the repentance or love to God that they made shew of, in crying unto God, and owning him for their God, and saying they know him, and acknowledg him only as such, and desire to be owned by him as his Israel, was all but hypocrisy; and that they called not on him as true penitents in uprightness of heart, nor out of love to him and his ways, which really they had cast off and forsa∣ken, but for fear of the evils only which they saw like to come on them from him; and therefore shall obtein nothing of good by their feigned applications to him, but find those evils which really they deserve and pull on themselves, viz. that they be by him deliver∣ed up to the hands of their enemies. So saith he,

v. 3. Israel hath cast off the thing that is good: the enemy shall pursue him.

Israel, who claimed that interest in God, as to be his God, and thought his very name a proof thereof, yet denying by their works him whom they professed to know, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Za∣nach, hath cast off, &c. So is the same word g 1.55 elsewhere in the same or other conjugations several times rendred by our translators, or by, casting away, 2 Chr. 29.19. Lam. 3.17. by, removing from, or, turning far away, as Is. 19.6. all to the same purpose; and shew∣ing that they took the Verb to have that notion which the Hebrew Grammarians as∣sign to it, of h 1.56 far removing, or putting away, (whether transitively i 1.57 or intransitively) or k 1.58 rejection, aversation, abominating, and the like. To the same notion likewise seems re∣spect to be had in the most Latin Translations, while they render it by, projecit, (as the Vulgar Latin, which the Doway renders, hath cast away,) dereliquit, deseruit, repulit, elonga∣vit, l 1.59 abominatus est, recessit procul, &c. hath left or forsaken, put away or far from, hath abomi∣nated or departed far from, and the like. The Greek also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the printed A∣rabick that follows them render, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath turned away from himself, or as other copies have it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hath turned or cast away; the MS. Arabic hath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 have contem∣ned, left, or forsaken. The Chaldee hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The house of Israel have erred or turned away from, or after, or from following. The Syriac by the same word render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the Latin Translator of it renders, oblitus est, hath forgotten; the word in that tongue doth so m 1.60 signifie, and also, to erre from. All these come to the same thing, and all are reducible to the first notion of the word mentioned, and make that mea∣ning which ours give, in saying, hath cast off. That which they are said to have cast off, is, the thing that is good, so by ours expressed. In the Hebrew it is barely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tob, good; which, being so generally and without re∣straint of any article expressed, n 1.61 some will have it to denote God himself, who is simply, wholly, and universally good, and o 1.62 good to all, the author and fountain of all good, so that there is nothing simply p 1.63 good but God. Whatsoever is worthy of that title, is so on∣ly in respect of its relation to him who is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tob umetib, good, and doing good, (Ps. 119.68.) so that whatsoever any man hath, or enjoys of good, is from his relation to him, his neerness to him, and congruity with him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The drawing near to God is good to me, Ps. 73.28. All that is to any man of good, is from his being near to God, and his being, as far as human condition is capable of, like unto him. So

that they that are far from him, and put him far from them, necessarily cast of all that is good; and therefore against that exposition of Good here, so as thereby to mean God himself, who being absent all good is neces∣sarily excluded, as it is present where he is present, can be no just exception; yet do others think better to expound it, not of God him∣self, but q 1.64 of such things as are pleasing to him the author and rule of good, and there∣fore good as bringing men near to him, r 1.65 his law, his worship, the performance of their du∣ty to him, and observance of his ways and commandments, s 1.66 piety, honesty, which denominate men good, and make them par∣takers of good, whatsoever is godly, ver∣tuous and praise-worthy, good courses, such as the Psalmist directs to, as that which shall do good to men, and keep them in peace and safety; t 1.67 Depart from evil, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vease tob, and do good, and dwell evermore. In this latitude ours take the word, by read∣ing it, the thing that is good, and the Greek plainly, by putting it in the plural number, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, good things; whether we shall thereby mean things that are said to be good in men, or to them, to make them good, or do them good.

This is the most general and usually fol∣lowed way of construction of the words; but they are observed to be capable of another construction, viz. Good hath cast off Israel, viz, God hath rejected them, and this by v 1.68 some is looked upon as well agreeing with the fol∣lowing words, Therefore the enemy shall pursue, or persecute them thus destitute of his help. But the former way we may w 1.69 look on as the more generally received, so the plainer. Ac∣cording to either way, their forsaking God, and what is good, or their being cast off and forsaken by him, the ill consequence in the next words will properly follow; they will be exposed and laid open necessarily to all evils, and among them to that particular∣ly named, whereof they were then in danger and apprehension, viz. destruction by their enemies, x 1.70 the Assyrians. The enemie shall pursue him, y 1.71 Persequetur & comprehendet, shall pursue and overtake, z 1.72 ita ut fugere nequeat, that he shall not be able to escape: This is ac∣cording to the curse in the law denounced against them, if they should forsake the Lord, and break covenant with him, and not hear∣ken to his voice to observe to do his commandements, Deu. 28.15.—25. They have now so dealt with God, and he will therefore so deal with them, and cause them to be dealt with, and he a 1.73 will bring a sword upon them that shall avenge the quarrel of his covenant, and an enemy who shall b 1.74 fly on them as an eagle. The Illative, therefore, to shew the one to be consequent on the other, will properly be understood, though not expressed. It is in the MS. Ara∣bic not ill expressed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and therefore (or, for this cause) the enemy shall pursue them. The Chaldee also shews the ne∣cessary consequence, rendring the whole verse thus, The house of Israel have erred from after my worship, (or, from my service,) for the sake of which I brought upon them good; henceforth their enemy (or, he that hates them) shall pur∣sue them. While they duely observed him, he defended them from the enemy, and made them that hated them to flee before them; but seeing they cast off him and his service, henceforward they shall flee before their ene∣my that hated them, he shall pursue and over∣take them.

It may be wondred that the Greek of the LXX should here clear alter the construction, and should render what others render, The enemy shall pursue him, by, c 1.75 They have pursued the enemy, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is thought that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yirdepho, which sounds, shall pursue him, they did read, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yirdephu, which signifies, they pursue, or, shall pursue. The difference is only in the placing of a point, which in the first being placed on the top of the letter makes the vowel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o, which is an Affixe signifying, him; in the latter in the middle, makes the vowel, u, which is a note only of the plural number. But the sense in the former way is so much plainer than that which the latter makes, that if they had a copy in which it was so written, they might rather have suspected it as an error of the Scribe, than to have followed it. It may be indeed so interpreted, as to make it signifie much the same with the other; as if by, they pursue the enemy, might be meant they did that which cast them necessarily into the hand of the enemy, and even forced him to destroy them; they thrur. themselves violently upon him, as if they rather pursued him to be destroyed by him, than he them to destroy them; which seems to be Cyril's exposition of their rendring: as a sick man (saith Theophylact) that will not be ruled, may be said to pursue death, which he pulls on himself. But this sense is more harsh and strained.

v. 4. They have set up Kings, but not by me; they have made Princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their

gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off.

In description of those things by which Israel provoked God, and pulled down on themselves his judgments threatned against them, he proceeds in this v. to declare their apostacy from him, first in civil matters, then in matters of their religion. As for what con∣cerns the first, he sai••, They have set up Kings, but not by me, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He•• himlicu, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hesiru, have made Princes. That these words properly signifie, They have set up Kings, or caused to reign, and made Princes, there is no question. Yet are there who seem to render them otherwise, as the d 1.76 Greek of the LXX, and Vulgar Latin, the one ha∣ving, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they have reigned to themselves, which the printed Arabic, which follows it, renders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have reigned of themselves; the other, Regnaverunt, they (or, they themselves) have reigned, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Principes extiterunt, they have been Princes. So the words, accor∣ding to the ordinary use in those languages, sound. For reconciling which therefore with the Hebrew, in which they seem properly to sig∣nifie transitively, Regnare fecerunt, &c. they have made to reign (or, set up such as should reign, i. e. Kings,) different ways are taken. Some thinking it most convenient (as certainly it is) to reduce the translations to the Original, and therefore think that the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Latin, Regnaverunt, though ordina∣rily and regularly they signifie intransitively, have been Kings, and, have reigned, yet are here taken by these Translators as Transitives, and to signifie, they have made Kings. And it is e 1.77 observed, that the Greek word is so sometimes, especially by the Greek transla∣tors of the Scriptures, actively used to signi∣fie, Regem creare, to make a King, as necessa∣rily, 1 Sam. 8.22. Hear their voice, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, make them a King, and so by f 1.78 several of the Greeks here expounded. And the like will by the same reason be to be thought of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that by it should be meant, they made Princes, though perhaps for that there be not the like examples elsewhere: and they think therefore that in the like way the Latin, Regnaverunt, they have reigned, ought to be understood, they have caused to reign, and, principes extiterunt, for g 1.79 instituerunt, have been princes, for, have constituted princes.

h 1.80 Others rather choose to reduce the Origi∣nal to these translations, and would have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Himlicu, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hesiru, though according to the more general use of that form in which they are, (viz. the Conjuga∣tion of Hiphil, which gives a transitive or active signification to Verbs) they should properly denote, have made Kings, and, have made Princes, yet here to signifie no more then if it had been simply said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they have been Kings, and, been Princes; and as a ground for this pretend, that divers Verbs in that form of Hiphil do retain the bare signification of the Conjugation Kal, and are not made farther transitive, and that therefore these are proved such, by the au∣thority of those ancient translations. But I think there is not reason here so to do, a∣gainst the judgment both of all the Jews, and the greater part also of Christian Interpre∣ters, not only new, but also ancient. The Chaldee so took them as we do, who hath it, They have made Kings, and they have made Princes.

May it not be an easier way of giving ac∣count of the Greek and Latin translations, to say that they thought something under∣stood in the Hebrew that might signifie, them∣selves, as if it were, they have made themselves Kings and Princes, and if so, the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 would well express the meaning, though not punctually the words.

The difference between these ways is, that the one casts the fault on the people, the other on the Kings and Princes themselves: otherwise they both agree in the notion of the words, and in this also, that what was done by the one or the other is here taxed as sinful and blame-worthy. But there are some, who to the second word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hesiru, think rather another signification to agree, viz. They have removed Princes. So R. Salomo saith, that it may be expounded, they removed one from the Kingdom, and set up another, and that the Masoreth reckons this word among those, that though written with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sin, yet signifies as if written with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Samech, and so to be the same as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is, they have removed. And so Aben Ezra cites it out of an ancient Rabbi, viz. Yaphet, that so the sense may be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whether they set up a King, or whether they removed him. And Abarbinel approves of the exposition; yet we have no reason to desert the former more generally approved; according to which, whether his saying, they set up Kings, and made Princes, be the repeating the same thing in different words, and by Princes be meant i 1.81 those Kings, or by them be meant other inferior magistrates or k 1.82 Judges, which

are l 1.83 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 under the Kings, will not much concern us to insist on, the main matter for which they are taxed being, that what they did, or was done concerning the one or the other, was unduly done; which, as to the first clause is expressed by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Velo mimmeni, and (or, but) not by me, or, of, or, from me; and in the second by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Velo yadati, and I knew not.

Not by me, i. e. not by his command, ad∣vice, or instruction, or agreeable to such in∣structions as in the law he had given concern∣ing it, as Deut. 17.15. where he commanded that the King which they should set over them should be such, whom the Lord their God should choose from among their brethren. But they now, in setting up their Kings, looked not after his choice, nor advice, they took not him along with them in the business. So the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Velo mimmemri, and not by, from, or, according to my word, order, or command. Otherwise it cannot be said that any thing is done without him, without his permission, yea without his ordering too, though it be never so contrary to his com∣mand, and declared order concerning it.

And I knew it not. What is there done among men that God knoweth not? He doth not only know the outward actions, but the secret intentions of their hearts, and di∣scerneth all their thoughts, yea understand∣eth them afar off, or, long before, (as our an∣cienter translation reads Ps. 139.2.) even while they are yet in conceiving; not only what men have done, but what they intend to do. So that his saying, I knew it not, can∣not be so understood, as to import ignorance in God of any kind; but will be therefore to be understood, that he did not own or m 1.84 approve of what they did; and n 1.85 what he approves not of, he is said not to know. So the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and not of my will, or, according to my good pleasure; not accor∣ding to the directions by him in his law gi∣ven, or any command o 1.86 from his mouth; or else that they did not bring the matter to him, p 1.87 nor ask his counsel in it, as they should have done, by looking into his law, or en∣quiring of his Prophets then among them, or by some such means as he in those times af∣forded for making his pleasure known unto them, but did it of their own head, and as they thought best. To this purpose the Syri∣ac renders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and did not make it known to me. And accordingly the Manu∣script Arab: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have made Kings, but not by my command; they have made Princes, and have not made me know it. So that q 1.88 as far as in them lay, they did it without his know∣ledge; he knew it of himself, but not by their bringing it to him to make him know it, or any desire of his counsel or approbation, from them.

But here is a question made by Expositors, of what King or Kings, Prince or Princes, it is said that they were so made, not by God, and without his knowing.^r Some go as high as to Saul, the first King over the whole twelve Tribes, not yet divided into two di∣stinct Kingdoms; because, though he were chosen by God himself, yet it was by the re∣bellion of the people against God s 1.89 who was before King over them, and casting off him, as he saith to Samuel, 1 Sam. 8.7. They have rejected me that I should not reign over them. This Jerom puts, as his opinion in the first place, though he name also Jeroboam, as one to whom the words may also be applied. And it is so far approved by t 1.90 some, that they find fault with such as, forsaking that of Jerom, take another way. But surely besides that if we consult the history of Gods choosing and appointing Saul to be King, and v 1.91 command∣ing Samuel to anoint him to be Captain over his people, and saying that he should reign over them, and his w 1.92 giving him an heart to fit him for that office, and Samuel's saying to the people of him, x 1.93 See ye the man whom the Lord hath chosen, with other like circumstances; it will be hard, though with the help of any distinction, to apply these words to him, that he was set up for King not by God, and that God knew it not, there is another exception against it, not easily answerable, which is, that the people here taxed are not the whole twelve Tribes, united in one, as in Saul's time, but the ten, that revolting from the house of David set up a King and Kingdom, distinct from that of Judah, to themselves.

Others therefore looking on them as here distinctly spoken to, and found fault with, and taking a great part of their sin to be their defection from the house of David, on which God had entailed the right and title of the Kingdom, and y 1.94 their changing of the Kingdom and Priesthood of their own heads; will have the words to concern their setting up z 1.95 Jero∣boam to be their King (and then his successors) in opposition to the house of David, as ap∣pears by their carriage, 1 Kin. 12.16. when not liking Rehoboam's answer to them, they cried, What portion have we in David? neither

have we inheritance in the son of Jesse, To your tents O Israel, and calling Jeroboam unto the congregation made him King over Israel, v. 20. To what may be objected, that nei∣ther of Jeroboam it can be said, that he was set up King not by God, or without his know∣ing it, because God had by his Prophet A∣hiah the Shilonite told him, that he would rend the Kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and give ten tribes to him, and that he would take him, and he should reign according to all that his soul desired, and should he King over Israel; and it should be, that if he would hearken to all that he should command him, and walk in his ways, and do what was right in his sight, to keep his statutes and his commandments, as David did, that he would be with him, and build him a sure house as he built for David, and would give Israel unto him. 1 Kin. 11. v. 31. and vv. 37, 38. and by Shemaiah the man of God likewise said, that the thing was from himself, c. 12.24. answer is given both by a 1.96 Jews and Christians to this purpose, that what was said by Ahiah to Jeroboam from the Lord, doth no way excuse the people of Israel from what they are here taxed for; for no command or instructions were (for ought we find) given by him or any other to them from God, nei∣ther did they in what they did consult God by that Prophet, or any other means, to know his pleasure in it; but did what they did of their own heads, only out of a rebellious hu∣mour of casting off their lawful Sovereigns of the house of David, in which God had set∣led the right of the Kingdom. So that though they so fulfilled the will and counsel of God, yet they did it not in obedience to him, but with contrary intentions and plain disobedience; and so were no more justifia∣ble in it than the Jews in murdering Christ, though thereby they fulfilled what God had before shewed by the mouth of all his holy Prophets that Christ should suffer, (Act. 3.18. and 13.27.) or Judas for sinning in betray∣ing that innocent bloud, as himself confesseth Mat. 27.4. though Christ himself had told him that he should betray him, and b 1.97 said un∣to him, What thou doest, do quickly. He did what God had determined should be done; and so this people, yet so as not by God, nor in such way as he approved, and therefore they greatly sinned in so fulfilling his will.

The same may be said of Jeroboam himself, in taking on him the Kingdom which God designed to him, and gave him, exalting him from among the people, and making him Prince over Israel, that he entred on it, and so reigned, (according to the other rendring) not as of (or, by) God, but as of (or, by) the people, to whom, making him King, he hearkned, without consulting God by Ahiah, or any other Prophet, in what manner he should take on him the Kingdom, or by what means plea∣sing to God he should attain it: and after the obtaining it he manifestly opposed himself against God by setting up the Calves, where∣by to draw the people from the worship of God, and the knowledge or acknowledg∣ment of him, c 1.98 saying to them, and of his Calves that he set up for them, to keep them from going to the house of God at Jerusalem, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem, Behold thy Gods O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. So that though the d 1.99 cause were from the Lord for punishment of Solo∣mon's e 1.100 sin, yet neither he nor the people man∣aged it as the Lords cause, nor seemed to have respect to him in it; neither did they set him up, nor he set himself up to be King or reign by the Lord, by his command, or his approbation, desired, or had: and therefore though God rent Israel from the house of David, yet it is said, They, the people, made Jeroboam King, and he drave them from follow∣ing the Lord, 2 Kin. 17.21. So that what was, as on Gods part, justly done, was, as by them, according to the wicked intentions of their own hearts, and by unlawful means ef∣fected, unjustly and sinfully done. And the same sin was continued among them in their setting up all his Successors, and their reigning over them; it was in them a con∣tinuance of f 1.101 defection from the house of David, and rebellion against God; yet of some of them it is also said, that God exalted them, and made them Princes, as of Baasha, 1 Kin. 16.2. and of g 1.102 Jehu we read, that God sent a Prophet to anoint him, and to say to him, Thus saith the Lord, I have anoin∣ted thee King over the people of the Lord, even over Israel. 2 Kin. 9.6. And that he did so far accept of his executing what he did upon the wicked house of Ahab, that he promised that his children of the fourth generation should sit upon the throne of Israel: ibid. c. 13.30. yet in respect of his h 1.103 manner of taking on him the Kingdom, and his ill management of it in other things, and his i 1.104 not taking heed to walk in the law of God with his whole heart, will the same be said as in the case of Jeroboam; that both those that set him up, and himself, were guilty of that sin here taxed, so far, that in this Prophecy c. 1.4. God threatens to avenge the bloud of Jezzeel on the house of Jehu. and to cause to cease the Kingdom of the house of Israel. Others not so satisfied, as it seems, concerning this difficulty, as thinking, that of them it cannot be well said, that they were

set up, and reigned without God, and with∣out his approbation, will not have k 1.105 them, and their sons that succeeded them, to be here un∣derstood; but rather those other Kings, which without any mention of Gods hand, or his ta∣king notice of them, did reign among them, fetting up themselves, and set up by the re∣bellious multitude, and some of them by them also taken out of the way, as peculiar∣ly those after Zachariah the last of Jehu's race, viz, Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah, Pe∣kah, Hoshea, which being in this Prophets time may therefore seem more peculiarly pointed to, as shewing what was even grown into a custom then amongst them. In them, what they are here taxed for, both as to the Kings themselves, and the people by whom they were sided with and abetted, will be so apparent, that there will be no need to flee to another exposition which l 1.106 some give, viz. that by their setting up Kings, and not by God, and their making Princes without his knowledge or approbation, should be meant their seeking to foreign Kings and Princes for help, as to the Assyrian, and King Jareb, c. 5.13. to Egypt, and to Assyria, c. 7.11. so forsaking God and their dependance on him, and setting up them as Patrons and Protectors to themselves; which how it may be properly said to be a setting up Kings, and making Prin∣ces, m 1.107 may be doubted.

This being said of their exorbitancy in re∣spect of their civil-state, in the next words they are taxed of their wicked dealing in matters of religion also, in that of their silver and gold they have made them Idols, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Caspam uzeha∣bam asu lahem atsabbim, Their silver and their gold they have made to them Idols. So word for word; and so it is both by the Septuagint and Vulgar Latin, and Syriac rendred, i. e. they made or turned them into Idols to themselves; which others, taking the first words rather in the ablative case, render, Argento & auro suo, with their silver and their gold they have made &c. or, to make it plainer, adding, Ex, of, their silver, &c. with which ours agree. The meaning is in all one, as that of the Manuscript Arabic also, which renders, n 1.108 Their silver and their gold they have made to them there∣of Idols. Their silver and their gold; He calls it elsewhere, speaking of the like folly of Ido∣laters, Ezek. 16.17. My gold and my silver, viz. such as he had given them, as he there saith, and as above here, c. 2.8. he had mul∣tiplied to them; so that they were no otherwise theirs than from him, and therefore to his glory to be imployed: and the fault for which they are taxed is, That that silver and gold which God gave them for their wealth, for necessary use and ornament to themselves, they abused by bestowing it in making and adorning Idols, with great ingratitude and dishonour to him. The Chaldee saith, it was that silver and gold which they brought up with them out of Egypt, so seeming to un∣derstand it of the golden Calf in Aaron's time, Ex. 32.2, 3, 5. but here it seems spo∣ken of later times, after the division of Israel from Judah, and then we know Jeroboam made them two Calves of gold. 1 Kin. 12.28. And afterwards they also made of their silver and gold, Baals, and Images, (Hos. 2.8.) and of these the words may seem here more particu∣larly meant, the persons accused being not the Kings alone, but the people, who confer∣red their silver and gold for making to them∣selves Idols; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the people all of them, or jointly, as Abarbinel thinks to be hence mani∣festly proved. They all concurred in making to themselves 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Atsabbim, Idols; Gods they would have called them, as Jeroboam taught them to do, (1 Kin. 12.48.) but God calls them here by such a name as shews what really they were, the name signifying, o 1.109 griefs, troubles, &c. and therefore given to Idols, as being necessary causes thereof to those that worship them, and are grievous in the sight of God.

And this they did 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lemaan yic∣caret, that they may be cut off, as ours render it. The Verb is in the singular number, and so properly signifies, that he, or, it, may be cut off; and Interpreters differ concerning the person or subject spoken of, whether the peo∣ple, or the silver and gold, or something else, nothing being expressed. p 1.110 Some we say un∣derstand it of the whole people; and they that so understand it, because the Verb here to be referred to it, is in the singular number, where∣as the others, before spoken of them, are in the plural, (though we need not be much mo∣ved at it, it being usual, as we have before observed, to speak of a people sometimes in the plural, as being more, sometimes in the singular, as being one aggregated body) for making it more plain, supply something which may expresly answer to it in the singu∣lar number, As q 1.111 some put in Israel; That Israel may be cut off; r 1.112 others. Eorum quisque, every one of them; s 1.113 others, Populus, the people; t 1.114 others, Nomen eorum, their name; u 1.115 others, Rex cum principibus, the King with the princes; w 1.116 others, Totum regnum Israeliticum, the whole

Kingdom of Israel; or, x 1.117 Regnum cum Idolis, their Kingdom with their Idols. y 1.118 Others re∣ferring it, as it seems, to what is above said, v. 3. Israel hath cast off the thing that is good, will have to be understood, bonum, good, that good may be cut off from them, viz. the name and worship of God, the only good. More agree∣able to these is likewise the Manuscript Arab. Version out of Hebrew by a Jew, (perhaps R. Saadias,) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That they might be cut off (or, abstain, or, cease) from my remembrance, or, (that the expression may not be z 1.119 ambiguous) from the remembrance of me, or, from remembring me, according to what is said, Jer. 23.27. Their fathers have forgotten me for Baal.

But the a 1.120 Jews more generally take it as understood of the silver and gold, which for their making of it Idols should be cut off. Which way of theirs b 1.121 some censure as nimis frigidum, too frigid and slender an interpreta∣tion; because here seems threatned a grea∣ter judgment than the loss of a little gold and silver. Yet I know not whether it need be censured, the construction in this way being very clear, and the sense well agreetng with what in the c 1.122 following words is spoken of the Idols made of that gold, and it argues a high degree of folly and sin in them, who so ordered those things which God gave them for their wealth, and that they might have what to use to his glory and good to them∣selves, as not only to deprive themselves of the use thereof, but to make them destructive to themselves.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lemaan yiccaret, that it (or as ours, they) may be cut off. It is almost a ge∣neral observation of expositors, that the par∣ticle usually signifying, that, and denoting the intention or end for which a thing is done, doth not d 1.123 so here signifie, but rather the end or consequent which shall follow on the doing of it; and therefore some render it not, ut, that, but ideo, therefore; so the Ge∣neva English, Therefore shall they be destroyed. Yet if it be taken in that its ordinary notion, will it seem to have no small Emphasis in it, denoting that they in doing what they did, so perversly behaved themselves, as if e 1.124 on set purpose they would provoke destruction, and obstinately run themselves into it, though forewarned thereof.

v. 5. Thy calf, O Samaria, hath cast thee off; mine anger is kindled against them: how long will it be ere they at∣tain to innocency?

The great folly, together with the wicked∣ness of Israel, comprehended under the name of Samaria the chief city of their Kingdom, in their departing from God, and making to themselves Idols of their silver and gold which they worshipped, and in which they placed their confidence, is in this and the following verse shewed from the vanity of those Idols, and the ill consequents on their worshipping and relying on them, which were no gods, nor could help or uphold them∣selves, or those who made or worshipped them, but were evident causes of destruction to them. Thy calf, O Samaria; the calf which thou hast made, and set up in place of God to thy self. We read of two golden Calves set up at Bethel and Dan by Jeroboam, of which he said to the people, Behold thy gods, O Israel, and they accordingly went from all parts of the Kingdom to worship them. 1 Kin. 12.28, 29, 30, 31. Of any set up in Samaria we do not expresly read; but f 1.125 Samaria, being the head-city of the Kingdom, and the Kings thereof obstinately adhering to the sins of Jeroboam, who made Israel to sin, being named, may well comprehend the whole people, and the whole country of the ten tribes that worshipped the Calves. And those Calves, called, her calf, or calves, g 1.126 the Singular number being put for the Dual or Plural; although it may not be improbable, that h 1.127 in Samaria it self either by Ahab, or some of their idolatrous Kings, a Calf more eminent than the other two was set up. However the sense will be, thy calf, i. e. the calf which thou worshippest, hath cast thee off: the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach only (rendred, hath cast off) being in the Hebrew, thee, is supplied, for making the sense full.

This is an account of the words according to our translation, and such others as agree with it. But there are others different; for reconciling which between themselves, and with ours, and with the Original, and shew∣ing the ground of the difference, it will be convenient to observe in the first place some∣thing concerning the nature and signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach, rendred, as we said, hath cast off. The same word occurs before, v. 3. there also in the same way ren∣dred by ours, hath cast off, and there we have given some account of it; which that we may recount, and adde something which may concern the place, we may note, that that Verb is used i 1.128 both transitively, and intran∣sitively;

when transitively, as oft it occurs, then it will signifie, to cast off, to remove, or, k 1.129 put far away, to forsake, or the like; when intransitive∣ly, then, to be cast off, to be removed, or put away, or separated from &c. as AbuWalid will have it to be in Lam. 3.17. and here, though ours, with others, in both these places render it transitively, and actively. The taking it in these different ways makes diversity of inter∣pretations, and expositions; some taking it one way, some another. Those that take it transitively, differ yet among themselves, in giving the construction of the other words, either expressed, or (as they think) to be un∣derstood. Hence have we this variety of rendrings. Some taking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Egleca, thy calf, in the Nominative case as spoken of, and Samaria in the Vocative as spoken to, and supplying the person spoken of; Thy calf, O Samaria, hath cast off (deserted, or far remo∣ved, or the like,) thee, or them. Others ta∣king calfe as the Accusative, supplying the agent or person doing what is done, by, He (i. e. according to l 1.130 some, God) hath cast off, or far removed, or, according to others, m 1.131 ho∣stis, the enemy hath removed far away thy calf, O Samaria. n 1.132 Others making 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Egleca, thy calf, the Nominative case, or Agent, and Samaria the Accusative, or Patient, and then leaving the person spoken to to be supplied by the name Israel, or the like, thus, Thy calf, O Israel, hath cast off (or removed, or de∣serted) Samaria. Of these ways ours take the first as the plainest, wherein they have go∣ing before them several of the Jews; as Aben Ezra, who explains it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thy calf hath cast off thee, O Samaria, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath as it were rejected thee; for the city shall be destroyed, and the men thereof go into captivity. And to the same purpose Kimchi, (expounding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hirchik, hath put, or re∣moved far off,) Thou, O Samaria, thy calf hath far removed thee; as much as to say, for its cause (or, by reason of it) thou art removed far from thy country. Abarbinel also takes the same way of construction, Thy calf, O Sama∣ria, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath cast thee off, as if it rejected thee, in as much as it did not deliver thee. Whereas these supply, thee, as speaking of Samaria it self, and o 1.133 others, as we said, sup∣ply, eos, them, that makes no difference at all, the persons understood being still the same, viz. the Israelites,, or inhabitants of Sama∣ria, whom the calf or Idols that they wor∣shipped were said p 1.134 to cast off, in that they were a cause of their being cast off by God, and given up to be led away captives, and could not afford them that help and protection which they vainly expected from them; or q 1.135 its removing them may be understood of its alienating them from God, in whom only they might have found help and salvation, and so exposing them to destruction; which comes much to the same purpose. Nor do they much alter the sense, as Calvin observes, who making the calf the Noun governed, render either, God, or the enemy, hath cast off thy calf, O Samaria; all denoting, that these Idols which they set up to themselves, hoping they should save them, were indeed causes of destruction to them, and could neither save themselves nor their worshippers. Which is also that which is expressed, by saying in the other way, Thy calf, O Israel, hath cast off, or removed, i. e. caused, or shall certainly cause, Samaria to be destroyed, and the inhabitants thereof to be carried far away captives.

All these agree, in that they take the Verb in an Active sense, to cast off, or remove from, or the like: and in that doth the Greek also agree with them, but differ as to the Mood and Person; rendring it in the Imperative mood, and second person, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, cast off, or remove away thy calf, O Samaria. For so doth Jerom in the Latin translation thereof render it, Projice vitulum tuum Samaria, and r 1.136 others observe the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to signifie. rejicio, repello, submoveo, to cast off, to repell, or remove away. Although the printed Arabic, which follows the Greek, renders it, accor∣ding to another known signification which that Verb also hath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Comminue, break to pieces thy calf, O Samaria.

The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach, in the Hebrew text is of the Preterperfect tense, which ac∣cording to a known observation, and else∣where before mentioned, (as here also it is by s 1.137 several Expositors) may be rendred pro∣miscuously, either by that tense, or the t 1.138 Fu∣ture, for which it is usually put, where things are spoken of as determined by God surely to come, to denote them as certain, as if already done or come. But why the Greek should render it in the Imperative, I know not. u 1.139 Some think they read it so in the He∣brew, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zenach for Zanach; but this is only a bold conjecture: and I think it may as well suffice to say, that there being in this verse manifestly enough, under a denuncia∣tion of threatning against their Calf and its

worshippers, comprehended an w 1.140 exhorta∣tion to them for casting away that Calf, for prevention of that mischief, they thought best for giving the meaning or scope of the words to express it by way or in form of ex∣hortation, by bidding them to cast off that Idol, which would else cast off them, or be a cause of their being cast off.

But others, as we said, take this Verb as intransitive, and of a passive rather than active signification. So the Vulgar Latin renders, Projectus est vitulus tuus, Samaria, thy calf is cast off. (or away,) O Samaria. Whence Cap∣pellus also takes occasion of thinking that the Author thereof did read otherwise than we do, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be not Zanach, but Zunnach. But if the Verb be looked on as neutral, or in∣transitive, there is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 reason so to do; that will be its proper signification in the active form, though it cannot be so properly expres∣sed perhaps in another language but by a pas∣sive form; except we should s••y, x 1.141 Recessit, dis••essit, abiit, exulavit, or the like, hath rece∣ded, departed, gone far off, or shall recode, depart, or go far away, or go into captivity, which comes up near to the meaning. And of this nature will some of the learneder Jews have this Verb to be. So saith AbuWalid, whom they looked upon as one of their prime Gram∣marians, that it is here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Intran∣sitive, and signifies, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 longe recessit, exulavit, is gone afar off, is gone into captivity. R. Tanchum also expresly, The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Za∣nach is here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Neuter, or intransitive, and not, as it is above v. 3. transitive, or active, governing the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tob, good, as to signifie, hath cast off good; and if it be here resolved into an Active, the meaning (saith he) according to some will be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Thou hast deserted and far removed it, alluding therein to their presenting it to the King of Assyria, in their own defence, forkeeping him from doing hurt to themselves. For it being made of gold, they thereby thought to make him favorable to them, ha∣ving no other wealth left them, according to what is said c. 10. v. 6. It shall be carried also into Assyria for a present to King Jareb, or as Kimchi gives the opinion of some, O Samaria, thy calf is far removed from thee, for it is gone into captivity. For the King of Assyria, when he took Samaria and the cities of Israel, brake the calves, and took away the gold. So also the often forecited MS. Arab. takes it as a Verb. Neuter, or intransitive, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thy calf O Samaria is withdrawn, deferred, or cast off.

The Chaldee Paraphrast here seems some∣what to differ in the signification of the word, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have erred, or gone astray, after the calf of Samaria; whom the Syriac also following as to the sig∣nification of the Verb, renders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have erred by (or, by reason of) thy calf, O Samaria. By reason of the Chaldees so rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach by erring, Cappel again takes occasion of an∣other conjecture, viz. that sure he did read not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanach, as we now do, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Za∣nah, which signifies, to go a whoring. But why might not the Verb, so read as it is ordinari∣ly read, and so signifying, to go away, depart, or recede from, (viz. the right,) or the like, or to what is wrong, yeild him as good occasion of rendring it as he doth, as if he had read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zanah, hath gone a whoring? Which will more appear by looking back on his rendring the same word in the same manner likewise, v. 3. y 1.142 Buxtorf therefore I think well shews him to have but little ground for this conjecture, and indeed he seems too liberal in giving va∣rious readings; three he gives (as we have seen) of this word, besides the ordinary, and, I doubt not, the true, one in respect to the Greek, another in respect to the Vulgar La∣tin, and another in respect to the Chaldee, as if their copies all differed as from what we have, and, according to * 1.143 his confession else∣where, was in Christs and the Paraphrasts time, so every one from the other. I think it will be safer to think they all read the same thing, however in giving the meaning they gave themselves liberty of different expressions, as they thought would best give the notion which they conceived of the word, and be most agreeable to the scope of the place. And they all will concur in this, that we have here a declaration of the great folly and wicked∣ness of Israel in forsaking Gods worship, and making to themselves, and worshipping, and putting their trust in, Idols, which could not save themselves, nor their worshippers, but be a prey to the enemy, and expose them also to be so, and to destruction; and a de∣nunciation of such destruction to them and their Idols, and so an z 1.144 exhortation to them included, for casting away those things which were so pernicious and of such ill consequence to them. The certainty of those evils to them is sufficiently expressed, by speaking of what should come as if already come. And

what reason there was that they should certainly expect them, except they did cast away their Idols, and return to God, the next words declare, in which God saith, Mine an∣ger is kindled against them.

These words necessarily import, that God will severely punish them. a 1.145 God is not as man subject to passions and perturbations, such as anger, and fury, as men are, but when he bringeth on men such things as in men are usually the effects of such passions, and argu∣ments of anger and fury, then is he, spoken of in the language of men, said to be moved with such passions: and so then to say that his anger is kindled against any, will give us to wit, that he hath determined to deal with them in such rigor, as men so affected usually deal with those against whom they are extreamly incensed; not as with those whom they love, and would only correct in lighter displeasure, but whom they would se∣verely punish, or quite destroy. And this is by b 1.146 some observed as a peculiar expression of Gods declaring his high displeasure against the sin of idolatry, such as that here spoken of.

Against them, i. e. * 1.147 say some, against their calves, though in the foregoing words he speak in the singular, but as of one, so taking in those at Bethel, and Dan also, with any o∣ther that was at Samaria; c 1.148 others, against them that worshipped the calves, the inhabitants of Samaria, and Israel of the ten tribes, and then here is a change of persons from the second to the third, which d 1.149 some observe to be as a sign of indignation, as if for their vileness they deserved not to be spoken to. With this way agrees that of theirs, who in the former words read, not, hath cast thee off, but, cast them off, as we have seen; others, against both the calves and the worshippers, by, them, understanding both. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, against the calf, and against Samaria, saith Aben Ez∣ra, and we may well joyn them; against both is Gods anger, against the one because of the other; and not unusually e 1.150 doth God express his great detestation against ido∣latry by threatning both the Idol and the worshipper, to whom it cannot be but a great part of his punishment, to see that in which he placed his affection so shameful∣ly used.

In the following words is this reason in∣forced, and the justice of the heat of Gods wrath against them shewed by the aggravation of their sin from their obstinacy in continuing in it, refusing to be reclaimed, uttered in such a form of speech as imports indignation and wonder at their stupidity in so doing, How long will it be ere they attain to innocency? The words in the Hebrew are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ad matai lo yucelu nikkayon, which word for word sound, Quo••sque non poterunt innocertiam? and may perhaps be, as only so put, understood what they mean, but cannot, without adding something to make up the meaning, be in our language so rendred as to make them well understood: for to say, How long can they not innocency, or, Shall they not be able innocency? makes no good intel∣ligible meaning, nor indeed doth it in the f 1.151 Latin neither, without leaving something to be understood, or supplied, for govern∣ing such Nouns as may follow. Such there∣fore being the nature of the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yacol, in Hebrew, as properly to signifie, posse, to may or can, and having after it the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nikkayon, for giving the meaning of it in Latin or our language, there are g 1.152 two ways that may be taken: as first by under∣standing some other Verb which may govern that Noun; and this divers take, supplying h 1.153 some, ferre, to bear, i 1.154 some, colere, to em∣brace, k 1.155 amare, to love, l 1.156 praestare, perform, m 1.157 sibi comparare, procure to themselves, and ours, attain to, and such like, as the sense re∣quires. Like use it is observed to have in other places, as Ps. 101.5. I cannot him, i. e. bear him, and Is. 1.13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I cannot, i. e. not bear, or away with. Secondly, by ta∣king the Noun here as put for a Verb of the Infinitive mood, as Nouns are n 1.158 observed some∣times to be. And this way others take, as the Greek and Vulgar Latin, Qu••usque non poterunt mundari, How long can they not be clean? The Chaldee also, and the Syriac, to the same purpose: How long shall they not be able 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be clean?

And so Kimchi expounds 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Can they not, or, will they not be able, to be clean from this iniquity? as R. Salomo, How long will, or shall, they not be able 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To turn their hearts to be clean from that pollu∣tion? These all, it appears, take the Noun in the signification of a Verb; the sense mean while, in either way, is so fully the same, that it may seem indifferent as to that, which of them a man take; they being likewise both justifiable, both by Grammar rule, and by example; nor do we find in any other any

difference as to the signification of the words, nor indeed as to the scope of them, though as to the distinction of them, as to the periods of the sentence, some seem to differ from those that we have seen. R. Aben Ezra, ac∣cording to n 1.159 some, seems to place the interro∣gation after the words, how long, and makes the following to be as an answer to the que∣stion; as if the words should sound, My wrath is kindled against the calf, and against Samaria; how long shall the heat of mine anger be against them? till they be cleer or innocent, but they cannot attain innocency that it should be to them from it. I suppose he means, that they of Samaria cannot or will not be innocent from the iniquity of their calf. He seems not to drive at any other meaning than the for∣mer, though in ••omething an obscurer way, except we should take him to mean by it, in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that it should be to them from it, his anger; as if it imported, that they could not be clear from his anger, as long as they continued in that Idolatry which pro∣voked it, as a o 1.160 learned man seems to under∣stand it, which seems yet more obscure.

There be p 1.161 others, who read the word as a positive assertion without any interrogation at all, as Castalio, rendring the whole verse, Relicturi sunt &c. They shall leave thy calf, O Samaria, my wrath burning against them as long as, nequibunt innocentiam, they cannot (attain) innocence, i. e. innocentes esse, become innocent, in which way the sence would be likewise much the same. But I conceive the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aà matai, cannot properly be ren∣dred but by way of interrogation, or excla∣mation, importing admiration at their great obstinacy and stupidity, who q 1.162 having had so long a time of repentance given them, and been so often warned by Gods Prophets to turn from their idolatry, and threatned with so heavy judgments if they would not, should yet not be wrought upon to bethink them∣selves, but continue to pollute themselves with that abominable sin. The question doth indeed include an affirmation, that certainly if they will not clear themselves from that sin, his wrath shall continue to burn against them, and his heavy judgments to seize upon them; and withall intimates, that there is little like∣lihood of their amendment: so that though his warning of them shews him to be unwil∣ling that they should pull on themselves de∣struction, yet they appear wilfully bent to do it, as the next words farther declare. The MS. Arab. renders the words literally, the words in that language which he useth, ex∣actly answering to those in the Hebrew both for their signification and construction; but then adds in the end the mention of the sin, from which they would not cleanse themselves, or labour to make themselves innocent from, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 How long cannot, or, will they not be able (to attain) cleanness, (freedom, or in∣nocency, or to free themselves), from the worship of idols? which is manifestly the filthy un∣clean sin here spoken of, though not expressed in the Original, of which how wilfully guilty they were, and how affectionately addicted to it, how unlikely therefore to be with∣drawn from it, and what great folly such do∣ings argued in them, the following words also shew.

v. 6. For from Israel was it also, the workman made it, therefore it is not God: but the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces.

For: it answers to the Hebrew particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, among the known and ordinary significa∣tions of which is, for, or, because. By * 1.163 some it is omitted in their Versions, by others ren∣dred, certè, truly, as an affirmative: but I think best rendred as by ours, and others, in its ordinary signification; and so it seems to couple what follows with something prece∣ding, as giving a reason of it; and indeed it may be so looked on in respect either to the whole, or any of the three members of the foregoing verse. That their calf should cast them off, or cause them to be cast off by God, (according to one reading,) or, be cast off, (according to another,) there is just reason, from that it was a thing of that nature as is here described, a thing of their own framing, and the work of the workman, having nothing of divinity or power in it, and set up in oppo∣sition to God, to the provoking of him to shew his power in his destruction of them and it. Again, that his anger should be kindled against them here is manifest reason; because forsa∣king him the only God, they should set up to themselves instead of him an Idol of their own, which was no God. Thirdly, that it was not likely they should cast away their Idols, and at∣tain to innocency, appears, in regard that they were things that proceeded from themselves, and so shewed to what their hearts and affecti∣ons were bent, who taking no notice of Gods displeasure against their forefathers, for mak∣ing that calf of gold in the wilderness, shewed themselves still led with the like rebellious hu∣mor, and set up to themselves even this calf also.

This being said as to the connexion, the words in themselves shew, for aggravation of

that sin of gross idolatry wherewith Israel is taxed, first, their great perversness and wil∣full rebellion, in that, contrary to Gods ex∣press command of worshipping him alone, and serving him in that manner only which in his law given them he had prescribed, they set up to themselves other things to worship, after the device of their own hearts; calves, or a calf, which were from themselves, without direction or institution from him. It was of Israel, not of, or from him, that they so did. Secondly, their manifest folly or stu∣pidity in so doing, that the things that they set up to themselves instead of God, their calf, or Idols, were things that were not God, had nothing of divinity in them, no power of doing good to them, as appears both from the original and the end of them: they were things that were from themselves, and framed by the workman that they set on work to make them, and such which could not so much as defend or sustain themselves being made, but should be broken again in pieces.

These things, and what other are in the words given us to wit of, will better appear by taking the words and expressions into con∣sideration, as in order set down. As 1. for from Israel was it also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Me Israel vehu, ab, or, ex Israele & ipse, or iste, from, or of Israel, even it, that is as much as is in the letter of the words, as so joyned and distinguished from the following, and by ours, as most r 1.164 others, followed and made up by the supplying of, est, is, or fuit, was; ipse, or iste, it, or this, viz. this calf, for the worshipping of which they are taxed, is all that it is, from Israel; their invention, framed by one by them set on work, according to the thoughts of their own hearts, and de∣vice of their own heads, and so set up, s 1.165 not by any order or directions received from God; or (as t 1.166 others) their peculiar device not bor∣rowed from any other nation, as other Idols by them were, as v 1.167 Baal and Ashtoreth from the Sidonians, Chemosh from the Moabites, Mil∣com from the Ammonites, and the like: this was neither inforced or put upon them by others, nor were they by their examples indu∣ced to the worship of it, but was of, or from, Is∣rael's own peculiar choice and device; so of old that calf in Aaron's time, so those made by Jeroboam, and this other also, if it were an∣other different one, now worshipped at Sa∣maria,

But how are these said to be from Israel? It is commonly thought, that Aaron took the form of his calf, which he set up to them, seeing that they would force him to make an Idol, from the Egyptians, among whom they had lived, and been acquainted with that way of Idolatry: and so Jeroboam having lived among them, might take pattern for his two calves; and this if it were not meant of them, (both being, though in the singular number, included) or of one of them, yet might be made in imitation thereof, and so no new peculi∣ar device of theirs. w 1.168 Some think it sufficient for the taking away this scruple to say, that though they might perhaps have seen a calf or oxe worshipped in Egypt, yet this was no cause to impell them to it, who had been bet∣ter taught to know God. It was the wickedness of their own evil heart that drew them to it. But Drusius thinks by these words to be con∣futed those, that think the calves worshipped by the Israelites had their Original from Egypt, or else that it is to be understood, not of x 1.169 the original of the worshipping of calves in general, but of the calves in particular, which the Israelites made to themselves, and set up to worship; so that though such wor∣ship might have its rise from Egypt, yet this calf here spoken of, or any calf by Israel wor∣shipped, was from Israel, and by the work∣man by them set on work, made. But if by its being from Israel we understand what is opposite to being from God, as we said, there is no occasion of any such scruple, but only it will be affirmed, That this their calf and calf worship is, y 1.170 as all other Idols and Ido∣latry, of mere humane invention, contrary to the will and command of God, or any thing by him taught.

The Chaldee gives us another way, in re∣gard to which this calf is said to be from Israel; viz. because the gold of which it was made, or which was imployd about it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was collected of Israel, or from them jointly conferred for that end; as R. Salomo also ex∣plains it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Out of their silver and gold, every one of them it was collected, (according to what is said v. 4. of their silver and gold they made them Idols.) But these two ways little differ, and may be both reduced to one, viz. that this calf was from Israel, i. e. from their coun∣sel and contrivance, and at their cost and char∣ges: from the people of Israel, I mean, for so Israel is generally here understood, both by those that we have mentioned, and by others also, who differ from these in the construction of them with the following words, as we shall by and by see. And this I think better, than to look on Israel as the name of their father Jacob, as a learned man z 1.171 seems to do, who by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meysrael, ab Israele est, is from Israel, will have to be meant, ab ipsius Jacobi avo est, is from the time of Jacob himself, to wit,

saith he, when Rachel stole away her father Laban's Idols; as if this were the meaning, That they were even then given to idolatry, so that Jacob was fain to take away out of his family the strange Gods or Idols which had been stollen out of Laban's house, and to bury them under an oak. So that according to him, from Israel, must be, that they were addicted to idolatry ever since there was any called Israel. But this exposition seems to me no way plain, and I think it better to un∣derstand Israel of the people, and that present generation, when the calf spoken of was, by their consent, contributing their advice or votes, and their gold and silver, made: though if the following word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vehu, it also, be joyned with it, as in the Vulgar Latin, and ours and most modern translations it is, it doth indeed point higher than only to the present time, and seem to refer to somewhat of like nature before done, though not ne∣cessarily so far back as Jacob's time, whether we take by the particle, it, to be meant pre∣cisely a calf, as in the foregoing v. and in this again in the following words mentioned, or more generally any other idolatrous worship of like nature, as Teraphim, as those of La∣ban's, whatever they were, are called, or other like.

To proceed therefore, taking Israel in that notion, as we say, of the people so called, joyning in construction with it Vehu, signi∣fying, and, or even, or, also it, it gives us to have respect (as we said) to something be∣fore of like nature; and that is by many looked on to be that former calf made by Aaron in the wilderness, at the instance of the people, crying to him, make us gods that shall go before us; and for making of which they brake off the golden earings which were in their ears, and brought them unto him, Ex. 32.1-3. It may be, as by a 1.172 some it is, extended farther, not only to that calf, but to any other superstitions of their own inven∣tions, or to the Kings or princes which they set up of their own head, v. 4. to affirm, that as they all, or any of them were of their own invention and setting up, so was this calf also. And so is the Conjunction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, usually sig∣nifying, and, looked on as here importing as much as b 1.173 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gam also, which gives to com∣pare the thing spoken of, or to liken it with some other.

The Chaldee indeed seems not to take no∣tice of it, rendring only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hu, it, which makes Sal. Jarchi to note, that the Conjun∣ction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve may be looked on here as super∣fluous, as elsewhere sometimes it is, and to adde nothing to the signification. And so the Syriac trnnslator likewise omits it, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because it is (or, was) of (or, from) Israel; but I sup∣pose it is well taken notice of by the ancient La∣tin, and ours and others going the same way, as having due weight in it to that purpose which we have before said, viz. to the aggra∣vating of their sin, who having had warning from what befell their forefathers for making that calf of old, and their other idolatrous cour∣ses, should themselves, running on still in the like rebellion, do the same thing. And so doth also Salomo Jarchi note, that the Conjun∣ction may well be so taken into consideration in the giving the meaning of the words, as that they should import, Also this calf came from them, as that first calf did. This I sup∣pose may be sufficient for giving an account of these first words of the verse, which accor∣ding to the way that ours with many others take, do, being joyned together and referred one to the other, make the first clause therein, and so sound, as that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Et ipse, or iste, it, or this also, should be put to denote that which is said to be from Israel; and we cannot but look on it as giving a good construction, and a good meaning (perhaps the best that we shall meet with) of the words.

There are others who, as the words may be capable of other constructions and respects one to another, so do choose to give it them, though not much altering the scope of the whole. As first, that which we have from two learned men and accurate Grammarians among the Jews, R. Aben Ezra, and R. Tan∣chum, who do not look on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vehu, and it, as the Nominative case, and declaring the thing, viz. the calf that was from Israel; but as coupled with it by the Conjunction, and noting some other person from whom it was, as well as from Israel, and so governed by the same Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Me, from, as that is, so as to sound, from Israel and from him, supplying, is that calf, viz. that spoken of v. 4. in the words, Thy calf O Samaria, i. e. from that King which they did set up to themselves. R. Tanchum's words, which because express, and not yet printed, we shall set down, are these. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meyisrael, from Israel, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meatsat Israel, from the counsel of Israel: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e.

And it is said, that the Pronoun in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vehu is referred to the King before mentioned, of whom he said, They caused to reign or set up a King, but not by me; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

as if he said, for from Israel, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from him, that is, by the joyning (or consent) of their counsel and his counsel the workman made it.

Accor∣ding to him there is likewise a difference be∣tween this and the former way, that there is not a distinction between these words and the following, as if, from Israel was it also, were a distinct clause by it self, but that they with the next following, the workman made it, made but one clause. As for the understand∣ing it, as if what was done were by the joynt consent of Israel and their King, Abarbinel also seems to agree with them, or even with the former also, while he saith that the mean∣ing is, That the calf was not only from the King, but also from the c 1.174 counsel of the peo∣ple; but his adding, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. And the workman and smith which made the calf was also of Is∣rael, for that calf is not God, but the work of mans hands, suggests to us as if the words might also be rendred, for it (that calf) is of Isra∣el, and he was the workman that made it, or, and that workman that made it, viz. was of Israel. But these may seem too nice ren∣drings, though perhaps the words might bear them.

There is yet another way of rendring, which we have from Kimchi, viz. for (sup∣plying, it is, or, was) from Israel, and it, that is, as for it, the workman made it; so that af∣ter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of, or from Israel, he makes a pause, understanding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this calf was, and then joyns the Pronoun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and it to the following words, and it (that is, as for the same calf) the workman made it. And of this construction Mercer saith, that He∣braicae consuetudini accommodatior est, it is more accommodate to the custom of the Hebrew Syntax. The MS. Arabic I suppose follows this con∣struction, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for from Israel (supply, it is, or was) and it the workman made it; although his words so punctually for place and significa∣tion answer to the Hebrew, that of what ren∣dring is accommodated to the one, the other is capable also.

The LXX omitting the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, for, or because, with which this verse begins, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Miysrael, of, or, from Israel, have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Israel, which makes some con∣jecture that they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Be Israel, which so signifies; and then they look on the words as the conclusion of the preceding verse, How long will it be ere they attain to in∣nocency (or, can they not be cleansed) in Israel? So St. Jerom renders it according tothem, so also the printed Arabic, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 How long can they not be cleansed, (or, cleanse themselves) in Israel? But in the printed co∣pies usually we find 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 printed with a capi∣tal letter, as if it were the beginning of a verse, and I suppose it is better so put, and then there being omitted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, for, or be∣cause, as by some others also it is done, there being supplied some Verb, it will sound, in Israel it is (or, was) done, which will not so much differ in the meaning from, of or from Israel it is, or was, as that we shall need to say they read it other∣wise then it is now read. It will be much one to say, In Israel (and, by or among Israel) is it, or, from Israel is it, both will signifie that they are the authors of it, viz. of com∣mitting idolatry with that calf, which is spo∣ken of, and (especially if read with an inter∣rogation,) shew the great perversness of the people, who being Israel, Gods peculiar, should yet in, or among them, have such things done, viz. that God, their God, should be cast off and forsaken, and a vain Idol set up in his stead.

All these several rendrings which we have mentioned, as to the first words, tend much to the same scope, and shew Israel's perversness in forsaking the only true God whom they had been commanded to serve, to set up to them∣selves an Idol, which they had been by ex∣press command from him forbidden to do. The very mentioning of Israel, and calling them by that name, which puts in mind of so near relation to God, of such great things as he had done for them, and such obligations by which they were engaged to him, and the so∣lemn ties whereby they had d 1.175 avouched the Lord to be their God, as he had avouched them to be his peculiar people, certainly shews them guilty of great falseness and rebellion, in that any should have any part of their ser∣vice and worship but he alone whose name was called on them: And according to all like∣wise is their folly and stupidity manifest, in as much as they, they Israel, who had been fully instructed in the knowledge of the true God, his eternity and infinity, should set up and worship, instead of him who made them, a creature of their own fancy, a e 1.176 new God that was from themselves, and of no ancienter date. But this, though it were hence mani∣fest, he sees fit more at large to declare in

the following words, The workman made it, therefore it is not God. The workman made it. This, as an evident argument of the vanity of Idols, is elsewhere used; as Is. 44.10, 11. and c. 46.5, 6, 7. and Jer. 10.3. &c. it being put as an evident proof that their idols were not Gods, because they were f 1.177 the work of the hands of the workman; an evident argument certainly, it being a necessary pro∣perty of God to make and form; to be made or formed is a necessary denial of God∣head: yet so brutish were the idolaters, as it appears, of old, as to worship a thing that they had themselves formed, or knew to be, and had seen, formed by some g 1.178 Smith or Carpenter, according to the matter of which they were formed, and to h 1.179 fall down and worship it, and to pray unto it, deliver me for thou art my God, having not so much reason or con∣sideration as to say, i 1.180 is not there a lie in my right hand? I have made it, and can it be my maker? We have a perfect pattern of such brutishness in Demetrius, the Ephesian Silver∣smith, who made it an accusation of great weight, as he thought, against St. Paul, that he perswaded and turned away much people, saving that they be no Gods which are made with hands. Acts 19.26. But if these be Gods, how much more shall they be so that made them with their hands? for what have they, which these did not confer on hem?

How far gone the Israelites were in such stu∣pidity, or whether they who had been so far instructed in the law concerning the only true God, could or did think the calf by them devised, and made by the workman, to be true God, or whether they thought it a k 1.181 symbol of his presence, a representative of him, and so in it thought they worshipped him, I think it needless here nicely to enquire, or put it to the question. It is, from his bring∣ing here the original of it as an argument to prove it no God, manifest that they thought of it otherwise than they ought to have thought, and attributed to it that honour and worship which was due to none but God, and expected from it that help and good which was from none but from him to be expected, and were in such an error as was, by proving it to be no God, to be convinced; and certainly, by shewing thus the original of it, is that sufficiently proved. Yet if they were so brutish, as for all that to think, that though it were by themselves devised, and by the workman made, yet might by I know not what power influenced receive divinity, and become God, and so deserve adoration from them; this also doth he prevent by men∣tioning the end likewise of it; so shewing that as it was of nought, so it continued still a thing of nought, as should appear by its coming to nought, not able so much as to preserve it self, in that he saith, but the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces; whence follows, and therefore still no God, hath nothing of divi∣nity in it, but is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an unprofitable useless idol, as the Chaldee calls it. Thus will the words be continued one with another, according to that rendring which ours with many others give of them, which I think is very convenient; yet because there are others given, we may take a distinct view of the words, and see on what grounds they go. The first word in order is the Par∣ticle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, which ours render, but: and of those who agree else with ours in rendring the following words, some, l 1.182 quoniam, be∣cause; others, nam, m 1.183 for; others, ( n 1.184 not li∣king that) o 1.185 certe, certainly. The Particle sig∣nifies any of these, and is used for any of them, as will best su••e wi••h the place and oc∣casion, and either of them may serve here, and (but) as well as any, the use of it being for connexion of these words with the fore∣going, therefore it is no God, as a farther argument to prove what was before proved from the original of that vain Idol which they adored, being the device of their own heads, and work of the workman, that it there∣fore could have nothing of divine power in it, again, from the end it should come to, not able to defend it self, as if it had had any such it would have been, viz. that it should be broken in pieces. Others making it as a consequent as well as an evidence of its be∣ing such, p 1.186 render, atque, ideo, or q 1.187 ita{que}, there∣fore, because it is a thing of no such power as they would have it to be thought, and to evidence it, it shall be broken in pieces. This comes much to the same purpose, as long as the next words be by them rendred, or under∣stood, as by ours they are.

These words are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebabim yihyeh egel Shomron, The calf of Samaria shall be Shebabim, about which word there is great variety of opinions, and so dif∣ferent rendrings. As first, that which ours well choose, as backed I think with greatest probability and best authority among any sig∣nifications given it, which is, pieces, it shall be, i. e. as for better explication they adde, broken in pieces. This notion several of the learneder Jews assign to it, and prefer before others; and for confirmation sake, seeing the word is

not elsewhere found in the text of the Scrip∣tures, urge the authority of the Chaldee Pa∣raphrast, and some of their ancient Doctors, by which they think it made apparent to have that signification. * 1.188 The Chaldees words are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into the shavings off, or what is scraped, filed, or shaved off from tables, boards, or plates, little shivers. The proof which r 1.189 they give from the use of the word or its root by the Rabbins are, that one calls words of s 1.190 reproof, or reprehension, or threats, words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shemeshabbebim, i. e. is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shesho∣berim, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shemeshabberim, i. e. which break the heart of man. t 1.191 Some likewise adde what is found in them as a Proverbial expressi∣on, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shibba miccashura, a chip (or splint) out of a beam, to which v 1.192 some think allusion is had in that saying of our Saviour, Mat. 7.3. Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brothers eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thy own eye? taking that notion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shibba, which they take to be from the same root, in that saying, to be an argu∣ment that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shabab in this hath the like, viz. of any chip, or small piece of any thing; and so shevavim to be w 1.193 the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shevarim, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shavar, to break; so that without playing with the words it may be rendred, chips, shavings, shivers, any small thin piece, or dust, that a thing is broken or beaten into. To this head or notion are to be reduced those several ex∣pressions which interpreters, that go this way, use in rendring or expounding it, as x 1.194 fragmenta, y 1.195 frusta, z 1.196 scobem, a 1.197 contritiones, b 1.198 scissilia, and the like, all tending only to denote such shivers, flitters, mammocks, little pieces, or even dust, that bigger and more solid bodies are by some violent means as breaking, sawing, filing, &c. reduced to. A∣ben Ezra also saying, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebabim is the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebibim, which is the plural from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebib, which occurs Job 18.5. and is rendred a spark, or sparkle, seems to mean the same thing, viz. pieces as small as sparks from the fire, or else that it should be brought to the c 1.199 anvil to be beat to pie∣ces, and caused to sparkle or flee into sparks.

Nor do I think St. Jerom (or the Vulgar Latin) to mean any way different from these, whilst he renders, in aranearum telas erit, it shall be spiders webs, i. e. as the Do∣way render it, as spiders webs, for no man can think it should be properly or literally under∣stood, but by way of similitude only, to sig∣nifie into what thin plate or parts it should be beaten, as thin as a cobweb, or the like. This Version St. Jerom justifies on the credit of Jew, who he saith told him that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shevavim did signifie properly, aranearum fila per aerem volitantia, quae dum videntur intereunt, & in atomos & nihilum rediguntur, Spiders threads that flie in the air, and perish while you look on them, and are broken into atoms, and come even to nothing. A d 1.200 learned man of that nation, though now a Christian, thinks that Jew to have imposed upon St. Jerom, because there is no such thing found in the writings of the Jews, as to that signification of the word. But why might it not be then in common use a∣mong the Jews in that signification, though not in any of their books found? Neither do I find it in any of those Eastern dialects of affinity with the Hebrew, as the Syriac, or Arabic; yet that it might signifie some such thin and slender thing, we may guess by that in the Arabic, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sebba, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sabibah, from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sabab, e 1.201 do signifie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A thin rag, as of linnen, or any o∣ther thing; so that they might not improbably call such flying cobwebs by a name common to things of such thinness. However what St. Jerom took to be meant by this expression is manifest, viz. that this calf which being now in its glory, was adored by them as a God, should ere long be devested of its honour, and to shew that there was nothing of that nature in it, whereby it might deserve such esteem, be used even as common mettal, and reduced f 1.202 in minutissimas partes, to little thin or slender pie∣ces or shivers, that it might be put to other uses. So shall it be broken in pieces, whe∣ther by them or the Assyrians, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the King of Assyria shall be presented with it, saith R. Tanchum, according to what is said c. 10.6. it shall be carried into Assyria for a present to King Jareb; Kimchi also, They shall break it, and carry it away to make use of the gold, and not for that use it was put to while it was yet in the form of a calf.

To which purpose is also what others render with a different notion, which they think the word to have according to the use of it in the g 1.203 Chaldee, it shall be for h 1.204 instruments of ornament, jewels or golden ornaments. Pro∣bably the Assyrian might make such use of it being broken in pieces. This still imports a breaking of it, and so all these shew that it

shall come to the same end with that calf in the wilderness of old, which i 1.205 Moses ground to powder; by which means, as that appea∣red to be a vain Idol and no God, so shall this also now appear to be by its being broken to pieces, though both of them by them ado∣red, and called their Gods.

All these hitherto agree well, in that they take the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shevavim to signifie small thin pieces, fragments, splinters, or shavings, or the like, whether of metal or wood: which by the way I mention, because Lyranus from this word seems, I know not whether on good reason, to gather that this calf was not made of solid gold, but of wood guilded over.

But there are others, who think by this word denoted, not so much those pieces into which it shall be broken, that it may be carri∣ed away, as its being taken from its place and carried away, as if the words should sound, shall be removings. So the word according to its substantive form seems, if that signification be given, literally to sound, though it be un∣derstood as a Participle, as it is not unusual for an Abstract to be put for a Concrete, a Substantive for an Adjective or Participle, and so is by Abu Walid expounded, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Idol of Sa∣maria shall be removed, (or hurried away,) i. e. saith he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated from its countrey, going into captivity with its worshippers. The same exposition doth k 1.206 R. Tanchum recite, saying, that the meaning is by some said to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 it shall be removed from tis place, viz. from the land of Israel into Erak; and so the l 1.207 MS. Arabick translation here hath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Verily the calf of Samaria (shall be) in the num∣ber of those that go (or are led) captive. Of this exposition Abu Walid saith that it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 passable, yea 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 very good, yet that the first is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 better and more convenient. And this was manifestly ta∣ken by those Greek translators, who render, as m 1.208 Symmachus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is rendred, Inconstans, instabilis, inconstant, unstable, or that which is called the Fifth Edition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, va∣gus, fluctuans, wandering, wavering, as not be∣ing able to remain stable and fixed in its place, but thence removed and carried away. In this way that we have said, the scope of the place describing what shall be done to the calf it self, seems to require, that according to this no∣tion it should be taken as in a passive sense, otherwise, It shall be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. It shall be removings, might be taken in an active sense, as to denote it, shall be to Israel an occasion of their removing, or being removed, as Idols are like∣wise called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Atsabbim, sorrows, i. e. causes of sorrow. (see v. 4.)

The LXX do so take it in an active sense, though in a signification something (yet not much) different, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Thy calf was seducing, O Samaria, taking the word I suppose to sound, seductions, errors, or deceits, but for the plainer meaning, expressing it, ac∣cording to what we before said, by the Parti∣ciple, importing it to have been a cause of er∣ror to them. The printed Arabic exactly fol∣lows them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because thy calf is a seducer, O Samaria: The Syriac much alike, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But thy calf O Samaria hath been for error. A∣mong the Jews also have been some that here give the signification of seducing to this word. So R. Jafet, cited by Aben Ezra, as ex∣pounding it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because the calf of Samaria shall make Israel to be rebellious, though he censure it as not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nacon, right. n 1.209 Some learned men conjecture all the Greek inter∣preters to have read not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebabim, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shobeb, or Shobebim, in the Partici∣ple. o 1.210 Others think them not to have read so, but having respect to the signification of the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shobeb, as it it signifies, avertere, pervertere, seducere, to turn away, to pervert, to seduce, to have rendred it as if it had been writ∣ten 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shobebim, and the plural put for the singular number; yet it appears that some of them took it here for a plural, as in those fragments cited p 1.211 as various readings, out of Aquila 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, errantibus, sive conversis. But I suppose the most simple and regular way to be that which hath been said, of the expressing the abstract Noun Sub∣stantive by the Participle, in q 1.212 that signification

which they thought it here to have. These different expositions, though they are from different notions as to the signification of the word, yet in the ratification of them on the subject spoken of, do all concur, and are at once made good.

That which this is spoken of is called, as likewise before v. 5. the calf of Samaria. Samaria being the Metropolis or head-city of the Kingdom of Israel, may be put to com∣prehend the whole people. Two calves set up by Jeroboam, the one at Bethel, the other at Dan, and commended to them to be worship∣ped by them, and called their Gods, it is manifest they had. If it be true r 1.213 what the Jews report, that in the twentieth year of Pekah King of Israel, Tiglath Pileser King of Assyria took away from Dan the golden calf, and that in the twelfth year of Ahaz King of Judah, some eight years after, the other was taken away by Shalmaneser King of Assyria, it is possible that there might be when this was spoken, in that interval, but one of these calves left to them, and so properly spoken of in the singular number. But whether it were so, or whether the two calves be meant, though in the singular number spoken of as one, or whether besides those two the peo∣ple of Samaria erected to themselves another in their own city, as some conjecture, which is here meant, it will not be needful to en∣quire. That which is to be heeded to is, that in that calf, whatsoever it was that they then worshipped as a God, shall be verified what is here spoken, however understood, to prove it nothing less than what they esteemed it to be, viz. according to that rendring which ours follow, (and I think deservedly,) that it should be devested of its supposed deity by being broken to pieces, and, by being, carried away into captivity with its worshippers, not able to defend them or it self, put to other uses, and so shewed to have been all along a lie, and cause of error to them, and should be therefore as of error so of much mischief and dammage to them, as by the next words will appear, which are,

v. 7. For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.

The expressions in this verse are generally looked on as figurative, in a parabolical way setting forth the condition of Israel, what it was, and what it should be, what they had done or did, in those things that they have in the foregoing words been taxed for, as their forsaking God to relie upon others,, and their running after Idols, and what should be the issue thereof to them. Their costs and char∣ges, their labour and trouble, which they put themselves to, in so doing, was not only all the while vain and unprofitable to them, but should end in mischief and destruction to them. That we may have this meaning from the words, we must attend to the proper or literal meaning of them so far, as to see how they are applicable to that condition of theirs which they are brought to express. The first words, according to the understanding of which the rest are to be understood, are, For they have sown (or, do sow) the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci yizrau, for they have sown, as ours with s 1.214 others; t 1.215 o∣thers, for they do sow; u 1.216 others, for they shall sow, or, because they shall sow; others, w 1.217 certè (or, sanè) seminabunt, certainly they shall sow; others, x 1.218 cum seminaverint, when they shall have sown, or, whereas (or, seeing) they have sown; y 1.219 others, seminare solent, they are wont to son, or, pergunt, go on to sow. That in any of these significations the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci may be rendred viz. for, certainly, seeing that, when, and other like, or be taken even as an z 1.220 Exple∣tive Particle, is no doubt; as neither that the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yizraau, being the Future form, may be rendred as the sense will require, or best agree with it, either as the Present, Preter, or Future tense, or so as to denote a 1.221 actum conti∣nuum, a continued act or custom of doing. Which way soever it be here taken, the connexion of these words with the preceding will be much alike, as being a continued declaration of their great folly in doing what they do, and of the mischief which shall thence accrue to them, as by adding the following words will appear, the next of which, and governed of this Verb, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ruach, wind, they have sown the wind.

This appears at first hearing a Proverbial expression; for how can any be properly said to sow the wind? By it therefore it is by most agreed to be signified, the bestowing b 1.222 labour and pains (which is denoted by plowing and sowing) about that which is vain and of no profit. For explication of it, some say that the sowing wind is, when a man shall c 1.223 wave or throw up and down his arm, as if he were sowing corn, when indeed he hath none in his hand, and so doth only beat the air, and weary himself. R. Tanchum expounds it, as if by wind were meant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nothing. Kimchi to

the same purpose; wind, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in which is not any thing, or, no substance. But sowing seems to require to be understood something that is sowed, though perhaps as vain as, or worse than, nothing; as little profitable, if not more hurtful. And this perhaps may be the cause that the LXX do not render it lite∣rally, wind, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, things (or, seed) corrupted with the wind, blighted or blasted, in which is no pith that should spring up, and bring forth any thing that should be good. The printed Arabic, who follows them for want, I suppose, of a word at hand, renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 corrupt wind.

What these, which we have seen, render by, sowing wind, there be who render, sowing to, or for the wind. So Jun. and Tremellius, Cum vonto seminaverint, and so more anciently the MS. Arabic, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For they shall sow to (or, for) the wind, as if all they sowed were but thrown into the wind, by that to be dispersed and blown about. To which purpose, or not much unlike, d 1.224 some would make the Chaldee to sound, which they would have to be. Quae vento flante se∣minata sunt, those things which are sown when the wind bloweth. Some indeed render his words, Domus Israelis similis est ei quod ventus disseminat, The house of Israel is like to that which the wind disperseth: but his words are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the simplest in∣terpretation of which is certainly, The house of Israel is like to him that hath sown (or soweth) the wind, and reaps a whirlwind, although it may be also rendred, to that which the wind hath sown, and the whirlwind moves, as by others we say it is, viz. to seed scattered up and down by the wind. But the former is as a plain regular construction, so altogether agreeing to the Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci ruach yizreu, where the Verb being plural including, they, must govern the singular 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ruach, wind, and not be governed by it, ex∣cept any should think they changed the reading into Yizrao, of which there is neither need nor likelihood.

Now according to all, the words, though something differently rendred and interpreted by them, are to shew, that all the shews that Israel made in their idolatrous courses, all the cost and labour that they were at in setting up, and adorning and worshipping Idols, was vain and unprofitable, as ••ain as if a man should sow wind, or what is meant thereby, it being an usual expression to a Pro∣verb, of what is vain and altogether unprofi∣table, of labour to no profit. So saith he, Eccl. 5.16. what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind? and a known Proverb it is to ex∣press labour in vain, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to till the winds, and by much the same reason, to sow the wind, to denote that what they did was all in vain, to no profit or purpose. And so Kimchi gives the meaning of these words; It is as much as to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In vain have they laboured in this service (of Idols,) as if a man sowed wind, in which is nothing of sub∣stance: and so R. Tanchum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The meaning is, that their labour is in vain.

True is this so far; but this is not all. This wind is not as common wind, the tilling or sowing of which would be only lost labour, and taking pains to no purpose, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(to borrow the Arabic translators expression) a corrupt, pernicious wind, and which if we call nothing, it must be understood, not as nothing is opposed to that which hath being, or substance, but as opposed to what is good and profita∣ble; nor meant what will not produce any thing, but be quite lost, and meerly in vain, but that which will, as not produce any thing that is good, so certainly produce what is evil and noxious; for so will the following words shew, that by this wind here said to be sowed, for expressing the nature of their do∣ings, is to be meant. In all sowing is usually respect had to a crop to be reaped with in∣crease in the same kind: and so here, to make up the comparison by which the condition of Israel is expressed, is also mentioned their reaping as well as sowing. It is an usual say∣ing, that e 1.225 as a man sows, so he shall reap; if it may be supposed that a man should sow the wind, and cover it with earth, or keep it there for a while penn'd up, what could he expect but that it should, inforced by its being shut up, and accession of what might increase its strength, f 1.226 break forth again in greater quan∣tity with greater violence. So is it said, that from that which they are here said to have sown, they shall reap a whirlwind, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Suphatah, magnum turbinem, a great whirl∣wind, hath the Tigurin Version; in which no∣tion of the word it agrees with what the Jew∣ish Doctors observe of the import of that word. For whereas 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Suphah, signifies a whirlwind, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rougher than a simple wind, being caused 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as R. Tanchum speaks, from the contrariety of winds

in their motion: this form here put 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Suphatah, with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 T inserted in it, signifies more than a simple whirlwind, one of greater violence, the adding that letter serving 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to strengthen, or augment the signi∣fication. So Kimchi on the place. So that here is denoted not only loss of labour, but a pul∣ling on themselves, by vain labour, great mis∣chief, a plentiful crop of evil, agreeable to the ill nature of the seed; as much as to say, That by their vain and evil doings they brought on themselves, as the product and issue thereof, great mischief; which is by the most g 1.227 of Expositors looked on as by way of si∣militude, to express those great evils, that destruction and h 1.228 captivity, that invasion of the Assyrians breaking in on them like a whirl∣wind, which Israel by their serving of their calf, or other Idols, occasioned to themselves, and reaped as the reward thereof, so that not only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 no profit at all, but i 1.229 hurt and dam∣mage should come unto them. And this is as much I suppose as need to be said for ap∣plying the Proverbial expression to the con∣dition of the idolatrous Israelites, viz. by looking on the wind as to denote what is vain, and evil; the whirlwind, as to denote what is hurtful, and noxious, and destructive; and by the sowing the one, (or, to it,) to be un∣derstood the labour and costs they were at in their Idol-worship, and by their reaping the reward and issue thereof to them. Which may perhaps be looked on as well enough expressed, as to the meaning, though not to the letter, by what the LXX have, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and their k 1.230 subversion or destruction, as some, or, their end, as l 1.231 others, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Arabic, their defect or failing shall receive, i. e. succeed them, viz. those 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or seeds blighted with the wind, which (according to that Version) they sow∣ed, importing that the end should be answe∣rable to the beginning, the reward to the la∣bour. They seem in their rendrings to have had respect to the signification 1. of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Soph, as it signifies an end. m 1.232 Some by the expres∣sion of sowing wind, that makes a great noise and stir, look upon as implyed the great shew of religious devotion which they made in their Idol-worship. But, I suppose, that which we have mentioned of the vanity and unprofi∣tableness of what they did, to be chiefly in∣tended, and every circumstance which the words may suggest is not to be too nicely urg∣ged in such comparisons, but the main scope to be attended to; yet may both these be here taken in well together.

These words, thus taken in a figurative sense, being looked on as a description of Is∣raels condition, how things were, and how they should be with them, the following ex∣pressions are also by most looked on as appli∣cable in the same kind, and a farther declara∣tion of the same thing, the terms being taken from such things as ordinarily follow, or are expected to follow on sowing and reaping. The husbandman having sown his seed, ex∣pects and hopes that it should grow up n 1.233 first into a blade, then a stalk, then to an ear, then to full corn in the ear, fit to yield meal; then that it being ripe, he should reap it, and enjoy it for the food and profit of himself, and his family, and others: if these things succeed a∣right, he hath what answers his desire, and accounteth himself an happy man; but if it prove otherwise, and either of these fail, then is he frustrated of his hope, and made unhap∣py. And so is it here with Israel, whatever they hoped for in their idolatrous courses, they are defeated of, and they are in a condi∣tion like the husbandman, whose seed for the most part groweth not up so far as into a stalk, or if it doth, cometh not to have grain in it that may yield any meal, or if it doth and he reap it, or it be fit to be reaped, it is taken from him, and devoured by strangers, so that he cannot enjoy it, or have profit by it. It hath no stalk, (or, standing corn, saith our mar∣gin,) the word in the Hebrew being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kamah ein lo, There is not in it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ka∣mah, which being from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kam, which signifies, to stand, to rise up, to stand up∣right, may well be rendred by either; and the same is meant by them, viz. the o 1.234 corn as it yet stands erect on the ground before it be cut. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tzemach, the bud shall yield no meal; if on the stalk there put forth an ear that shall p 1.235 blow, and seem to have grain in it, that shall be so lean and empty, as that it shall not yield any meal to make bread of. The Syriac by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bud understands the ear that shouts forth of the stalk, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and there is no stalk to them neither ear that yieldeth meal.

R. Tanchum expounds these two clauses as depending one on the other, thus: It shall not prosper, neither shall be from it a standing ear, meant by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kamah, much less shall it grow to maturity, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kemach meal should come of it, his words in Arabic being,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Chaldee Pa∣raphrast doth not so particularly and lite∣rally express the words of this clause, but in brief and more general language, thus, To which is no standing corn, it shall not make (or produce) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nob, fruit, or increase. The LXX also putting both clauses into one; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an hand∣ful (or sheaf) not having force to make or yield meal, viz. they shall reap; so that the words, stalk, and bud, they comprehend in one name of, handful, or sheaf. On which rendring of theirs Tremellius notes, that the reason of the difference of it is not to be sought from the reading of the words, it being out of doubt, eos non verba sed sensum studuisse red∣dere, that they endeavoured not so much to ren∣der the words, as to give the sense.

3. If so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ulai yaaseh, If it yield: the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which elsewhere signifies, perhaps, is here noted by R. Tanchum to sig∣nifie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, if, and with the Conjuncti∣on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, and, understood to be as if it were said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veim, and if, or, as R. Salomo, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, also if; although others look upon it as in its other usual signification, including the expectation of a thing to be, as much as to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and that which perhaps shall bear fruit; or as Aben Ezra, sup∣plying first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and if ye shall say, perhaps it will yield, know that strangers shall swallow it up; strangers, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Enemies, spoilers, or enemies that shall spoil. The Syriac renders this as not importing so much, as the others make it to do, that some of those buds should come to afford meal, but q 1.236 as only supposing that if they should, what should have then become of them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And if there should have been any to them, strangers should or would have eaten it.

Thus is the distinction of the clauses of this verse in our translation, and such others as we have mentioned, and several others; but there are r 1.237 others who differently distinguish them, viz. There shall be to the stalk (or stand∣ing corn) no bud, it shall yield no meal, if so be it yield &c. or, as others, s 1.238 The standing stalk, there is no bud in it, neither shall it yield meal, as if he should say, There should come up a stalk, but without bud, and therefore no increase of corn should be from it. And with these agrees the MS Arabic, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The stalk hath no sprout, neither doth it make meal. But Tremellius ob∣serves, that in such reading there is not due regard had to the accent, and the clauses are confounded, and the elegant gradation in the words obscured. However, here is no alte∣ration of the signification of the words, nor of what they will have to be the scope of them figuratively taken, vtz. to shew the vanity and unprofitableness of all that the Israelites, forsaking the worship of God alone, in their idolatrous ways and superstitions, do or at∣tempt in any way, for, as they suppose, ad∣vantage to themselves. In nothing shall they thrive or prosper, nothing that they suppose most for advantage to them, shall be beneficial; or if any thing seem to them to be at any time, or for a while so, it shall end in loss and mischief to them; they shall be deprived of the hoped for good, and nothing what may be profitable shall be left to them, but only real mischief; and so shall they be in a con∣dition like that of a miserable husbandman, with whom all things should succeed accor∣ding to those expressions in the words given.

So by the most are the terms looked on as to be applied by way of figure or compa∣rison to Israel, as setting forth the ill success of their idolatrous ways. But R. Tanchum is so unsatisfied with the congruity of the application, especially of the latter words, that he conceives the words of the whole verse t 1.239 not to be spoken by way of comparison, for declaring the fruitlesness and ill success of their false opinions and idolatrous practises, but properly to be meant of their tillage and harvest, and what concerned the fruits of the earth, and their expectation from them. But then the first words, however spoken of that, will be necessarily figurative. How can any properly be said, to sow the wind, or reap the whirlwind? It must necessarily be a figu∣rative and Proverbial expression, the mean∣ing of which we have already seen, but shall adde his words, in which he gives his mean∣ing of it, because not yet printed: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 v 1.240

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

He gives to understand that their labour is in vain, because blessing is taken off from their labour, because of the lighting of pu∣nishment on them; and it is as if they sowed the wind, that is, nothing, and reaped what was like to it.

We may adde from Kim∣chi, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or what is of less value, or worse, than that, a whirlwind being worse than an ordinary wind. The other words may be properly understood, as he would have them, and if so, are a denunciation of scarcity, fa∣mine, and poverty to them, by naming those things on which they are necessarily conse∣quent. Yea, which way soever taken, whe∣ther figuratively and comparatively, as others take them, or properly, as he will have it; in both are they an evident threat of punish∣ment to them for their evil courses, and that nothing shall prosper to them, but all things end in mischief to them, through the substra∣ction of Gods blessing from them and their indeavours, and his w 1.241 curse on them, by which they shall be frustrated in all that they hoped to receive good and comfort from: so that as in the foregoing verse is shewed what should become of their deified calf, so in this. what should become of other things which they might place any confidence in, and think should be for their wealth, all come to nought. What remains but their persons? and of them what shall become, the following words shew.

v. 8. Israel is swallowed up, now shall they be among the Gentiles, as a ves∣sel wherein is no pleasure.

Israel is swallowed up; the people so called. This might be well affirmed of them, though no more should be added than what is said in the foregoing words, viz. if so be it yield, viz. their corn yield increase, the strangers shall swallow it up; the same word being in both clauses used, there in the active 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yiblauha, shall swallow it up, and here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nibla, in the Passive, is swallowed up; and so x 1.242 some think it enough to expound it by, Devo∣rabuntur opes ejus & facultates eorum, their riches and wealth shall be devoured. A man is said to be undone, when what he should sub∣sist by is taken away from him, and people to be destroyed, when their cattel, and corn, and goods are destroyed; as Deut. 28.51. He shall eat the fruit of thy cattel, and the fruit of thy land untill thou be destroyed. But here seems an addition to what was in those words said of the destruction of their goods, on enjoyment of which their outward welfare depended, by shewing what should happen to their persons themselves, viz. that they also should be swallowed up by the enemy; so Aben Ezra, joyning both, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall swallow up your harvest, they shall also swallow up the sowers.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nibla, is swallowed up. Perditus est, y 1.243 some render, and so R. Tanchum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is perished, or destroyed, as he saith, from the same root is said Job. 2.3. Thou movest me against him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Leballeo chinnam, to destroy him without cause, as ours in the text, or, as in the margin, to swallow him up; which is the more literal rendring, and is by them here put in the text, and is, though both sig∣nifications well agree, yet I think, the most apposite and expressive of the nature of the thing spoken of, importing what shall be the condition which Israel is here threatned to be brought to, viz. that though they be not brought to utter destruction and annihilation, yet they shall be so swallowed up as it were by other nations, amongst whom they shall be dispersed, and mingled with them; that they shall retain, z 1.244 neque rem, neque nomen po∣puli Dei, neither the condition, neither the name of a 1.245 Israel, as the people of God, or a people at all of their own jurisdiction; as it hath been long since plainly verified in the ten tribes, which have been for so many years so lost among the Gentile nations, that even the very name of them is perished, and none can say where they are.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nibla, is swallowed up. The Verb for form being of the Pretertense would b 1.246 lite∣rally denote that which is already come to pass, but is by c 1.247 many expounded as the Fu∣ture, shall be swallowed, or the like, with this note set upon it, That it is so put as it is, to shew the certainty and the suddennes of that which is threatned to come on them, accor∣ding to that usual custom in the writings of the Prophets, to speak of things that certain∣ly and speedily shall be, as of things already done, or in doing, as we have had elsewhere examples. Such was the present condition of Israel, considering what the history of their affairs sheweth them to have already suffered, as that the word, as by ours or others ren∣dred, as denoting what was already present

might be well enough spoken of them, as d 1.248 in good measure verified already in them; yet the completing of what is in these words de∣nounced, depending on the utter destruction of their Kingdom, and their being carried captive by the Assyrians, will it be even ne∣cessary to understand the Verb with reference to the future, and what was yet, though shortly and certainly, to come. Which also is to be observed concerning the following Verb in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Attah hayu bag∣goim, which literally sounds, now have they been among the nations, and is so by e 1.249 many rendred, yet expounded as in the Future; so that nunc factus est, now hath been, or is now become, should sound, proximè fict, shall shortly become. It is therefore by ours, as by many o∣thers, so rendred, they shall be. The Particle, f 1.250 now, added, declaring that this punishment, though not wholly come upon them, yet shall certainly come, and not be long delayed. Now shall they be among the Gentiles, by whom they shall be shortly swallowed up, or g 1.251 being swallowed up of them, and carried into cap∣tivity, and deprived of all their wealth and former dignity, as a farther evil added to their captivity, (or even among those to whom they sought for help.) h 1.252 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cicli ein chaphets bo, as a vessel wherein is no pleasure, i. e. very much despised and had in contempt, looked on as a vessel that is put to the vilest uses, or cast away as not fit for any use. For denoting an abject or de∣spicable condition is the same expression else∣where used, as i 1.253 Jer. 22.28. Is this man Co∣niah a despised broken Idol? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Is he a vessel in which is no pleasure? where∣fore are they cast away he and his seed? Such vessels St. Paul 2 Tim. 2.20. calls 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, vessels to dishonour, opposing to them there vessels 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to honour. There may be compared likewise what the Psalmist saith in expression of an abject and low condition, by a comparison to a vessel, I am like a broken vessel, Ps. 31.12.

What vessels are by this name here meant, is not particularly expressed; some in ex∣pounding it instance in those of the unclean∣nest sort, and most sordid use; wherein I think they do not so well, the Scripture it self ha∣ving forborn to do it. What some Jewish Doctors observe of the Hebrew language, that it is therefore called the Holy tongue, be∣cause it hath not in it the names of obscene things, may be observed of the language of the whole Scripture, and therefore where that refrains from naming things of filthy or foul sound, I suppose it is convenient to imitate and retain its purity, in abstaining from such words as may be offensive to modest mens ears; and therefore do the most of translators do well here in contenting themselves with more general terms, though they render it some of them not just according to the He∣brew: as the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and accordingly the LXX, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; the printed Arabic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not good or useful; the Vulg. Latin, immundum, unclean; the Tigurin, ingratum, unacceptable; Munster, quod nullius est valoris, which is of no value, and the like. Cyril suggests a different exposition, as if it might be understood, That because Israel was such an unprofitable and despised vessel, therefore they should be henceforward among the Gentiles, and carried from their own country, and dispersed among them; but the former is the plainer way.

v. 9. For they are gone up to Assyria, a wild ass alone by himself; Ephraim hath hired lovers.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For &c. This Particle gives the connexi∣on of these words with the former, as shewing why it should be so with them as in those is said it should, viz. because they forsaking and standing out against God went to the As∣syrians, thinking to make them their friends, and under their protection to find shelter from what God had denounced against them. They are gone up, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Alu. I think it is a needless scruple which is made by k 1.254 some, concerning the use of this word in this place, how it should be said, they went up, whereas accor∣ding to the situation, the land of Israel was higher than that of Assyria, so that their going from it thither was rather a going down than up. But there is no necessity of standing so nicely on the propriety of that signification, but that it may more largely be taken for the removing from a place, and going to another, without respect to the situation, whether it be higher or lower, or on even ground. Besides some places by Kimchi for the justifying of this signification, I think there is one that may be properly here urged, viz. Jer. 37.5. where it is said, that the Chaldeans, who be∣sieged Jerusalem, hearing of Pharaoh's army coming forth of Egypt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve yealu meal yerushalaim, which would, if that notion of ascending be strictly insisted on, sound, and they ascended (or went up) from Je∣rusalem, which, according to them who make the forementioned scruple, cannot be proper∣ly

said; seeing according to them Jerusalem was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 higher than any other part of the land of Israel, and is there∣fore there well by ours translated only, they departed from Jerusalem, as not importing their going to some higher place, but only their going thence else whither. And so here by their going up to Assyria, it will be sufficient to understand that they went from their own land into Assyria, without putting us to the labour of examining where the King of Assy∣ria was when they went up to him, whether in some higher part of the land of Israel, as when Pul King of Assyria came up against the land, and Menahem for obtaining his favour went up to him where he was, 2 Kin. 15.19. or when Shalmanezer came up against Ho∣shea &c. c. 17.3. or whether this may be understood of their coming up again to their own country, after they had gone thither, as l 1.255 some seem to think. These and such like enquiries we shall be freed from, by taking the word to signifie in a large sense, as we said, plainly, m 1.256 to go. And so Kimchi ob∣serves R. Saadiah to have taken it simply for as much as n 1.257 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bau, they came, or went in∣to, or unto. and so the Arabic MS. Version, (which probably is R. Saadiah's) though it have in the text 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have gone up to Musal, yet hath a note added that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Alu may be taken for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They went into, or unto. Besides that they looking on the Assyrians as superior to them, may be well said, to go up to them, without respect to the height or lowness of the place that they were in.

The Verb is of the Preterperfect tense, and so by ours and most others rendred, ascenderunt, they have gone up. Yet are there o 1.258 others of good note, who render and under∣stand it as in the Future, ascendent, shall go, so understanding it, not as the former, for their going thither to seek aid and friendship, but of their going thither into captivity, as they should not long after do. To which going thither of theirs that the Chaldee Paraphrast had respect, appears from the signification of the word that he useth, though he put it in the Pretertense, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Galu, they have gone cap∣tives, i. e. shall certainly and speedily go.

To Assyria, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ashur, the name of the country, but including the King or the peo∣ple of the country, and appliable to either as the sense shall require. A wild ass, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pere, as in Arabic also that beast is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Phara, of which frequent mention is made elsewhere in the Scripture. Amongst the p 1.259 properties to him therein and in other writers attributed, such as it will be conve∣nient for us to take notice of for the explica∣tion of the place, and that we may know the reason of the Epithet here added, some con∣cern either the place of his delight or abode, others his condition and behaviour there. 1. As for the place in which he delights and chooseth to abide, it is the wilderness, he is E∣remicola, an inhabitant of the desert, flying and withdrawing himself from the company of men, and places inhabited by them, and so by the Prophet described 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pe∣reh limmud midbar, a wild ass taught, or used or accustomed to the wilderness, i. e. as R. Tan∣chum expounds it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 accu∣stomed to go up and down in it. Jer. 2.24. And so Job c. 39.5. wh•• hath sent out the wild ass free, &c? whose house I have made the wilderness, and the barren land his dwelling: and Is. 32.14. by the joy of the wild ass, is expressed a place laid desolate and forsaken by men. 2. As for the nature and condition of him, he is looked on as very wild, heady, unruly, extravagant, and obstinate in his courses, though tameable by the industry of man, as other the wildest and fiercest of creatures; yet by nature ve∣ry undisciplinable, perverse, and pertinacious, running on, r 1.260 and that with great swiftness, whither his lust, hunger, thirst, or other de∣sires draw him without rule or direction, and hardly to be turned away or back from his intended course; of which the forecited places give us also to wit. So in that place of Je∣remiah it follows, that snuffeth up the wind at s 1.261 her pleasure, (or, the desire of her heart, as in the Margin) who can turn her away, (or reverse it? as the Margin.) The explication of which R. Tanchum thus gives us: that by snuffing up the wind at her pleasure, is meant, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That she goeth whithersoever she will, and betaketh her self whither she listeth, so that none can hinder her from her purpose. The like natural wilderness seems expressed likewise in the place of Job, in his saying that he is sent out free, and that he scorneth the multitude of the city, and regardeth not the crying of the driver. So noted is he for his obstinacy in following his course, whither his own intentions lead him, that the q 1.262

Arabs, who are almost his companions or fellow inhabitants of the desert, express t 1.263 a man 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 u 1.264 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 who is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boded, sin∣gular, obstinate, and pertinacious in his pur∣pose, not to be withdrawn from it, use as a Proverb that he is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a wild asses colt alone by himself, as we may well and almost literally render it: to which proper∣ty may well seem alluded what is said in Job 11.12. Man is born like a wild asses colt, as wild, brutish, and perverse, till by good nurture tamed and disciplined.

In regard to either of these properties may the Epithet here added 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boded lo, so∣litarius sibi, solitary to himself, as the Vulgar Latin, or, as ours, alone by himself, (the sig∣nification of the root importing, w 1.265 solitude, or being alone,) be attributed to the wild ass, and some look on the one, others on the other as had respect to in it. Some taking him as so de∣scribed, x 1.266 quia in locis desertis & solitariis ver∣satur, because he keeps in desert and solitary pla∣ces, and in this way they look on the Pro∣noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lo, signifying, sibi, to or by himself, to be as it were redundant, as to the meaning, and not to have much influence on it, as in many other places it is so put, and so re∣spect to be had more to the solitariness of the place as not frequented by men, than of the beast in it; because they find it observed, that he doth not in that place keep himself always alone, but herds with others of his own kind. But however that observation may perhaps be well fitted to the Hebrew, and likewise to the Latin, solitarius sibi, yet I know not whether it will so well agree to our English translation, alone by himself, that himself should be said to confer nothing to the sense, but to be superfluous; and perhaps it ought to have its due weight and import, That though wild asses be often there found in whole herds, yet it is usual for some one of them to break away, and separate himself from his company, and run alone at random by himself, and that one so doing is here spoken of. In which regard the other will also pro∣perly agree to him, in regard to which the words will well be spoken of him, and to which some seem to think them to have, espe∣cially respect, viz. his traversing his ways in the wilderness, and without guidance or dis∣cretion running on whither he likes, not ea∣sily stopped in his way, or turned back, and without fear of, or regard to, any inconve∣nience that may happen; in so much that by this means he often exposeth himself for a prey to the Lion, or like ravenous beasts, in which regard it is said, Ecclesiasticus 13.19. The wild ass is the lions prey in the wilderness, of which we shall have occasion here also by and by to take notice.

In this regard seems R. Tanchum to think this Epithet here attributed, explaining it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 separated in his purpose to himself, that is, I suppose, addicted to his own mind, singly and obstinately bent on his own will. The Arabic MS. using the same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that he doth, but without ad∣dition of the other renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 separatus animae suae, i. e. sibi, exactly the same with that of ours, alone by himself, and that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boded, solitarius, or alone, may as well be attributed to one that is so in the inten∣tions or purposes of his mind and his ways, as to him that is in a solitary place, or sepa∣rate from company, is confirmed by the use of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yostabaddo, in the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Mistabaddon, in the Partici∣ple, which is usually so applied, as appears by what hath been before cited.

This being said as to the signification of the words, it will be a farther enquiry who is the person meant or described by them; for it is manifest that the Scripture saith not this only to describe to us the nature of a wild ass, but to set forth some that is in conditions like him, and that therefore there is to be un∣derstood the Particle y 1.267 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ca, or something else which may signifie, as, or like, or some∣thing equivalent, so as to sound, like a wild ass &c. But who that person or persons is or are, it may be doubted, there being before mentioned both Israel (they,) and Assur, or the Assyrian; and there being nothing either in the signification or construction of the words that determins it to either, neither in the Hebrew nor our translation. Many there∣fore understand it as a comparison of Israel to such an Ass, and supply something which may restrain it to them. So the Chaldee as to that, though otherwise not giving a literal translation of the foregoing words, as using the liberty of a Paraphrast;

Therefore are they gone into captivity, because they have gone according to the pleasure of their own mind as a refractory wild Ass.

The Syriack al∣so, Because they have gone up to Assyria, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 like a solitary wild ass, or, that is alone by himself. The Vulgar Latin likewise rendring, Ascenderunt ad Assur

onager solitarius sibi, by putting onager z 1.268 in the Nominative case, whereas Assur is the Ac∣cusative, plainly makes it an Epithet of Is∣rael, not of Assur. Which likewise several other Latin translations plainly do, rendring a 1.269 ut, or veluti, & sunt veluti onager. As the MS. Arabic also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and have been, or are become, like a wild ass. And this way follow the chief of the Hebrew Expositors. So R. Salomo, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. They are become as a wild ass, which goeth alone by himself snuffing up wind, wandring from place to place. So Kim∣chi, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c, Behold he is as a wild ass that goeth alone by himself, snuffing vp wind in the wilderness, so is he going after his own counsel to seek help here and there from Egypt and Assur. With whom likewise I look on Abarbinel as agreeing in the same way of construction, though in rendring the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pere, which they render, a wild ass, he seems differing from them, while he takes it rather for b 1.270 b 1.271 a wild man; his words being that what is said, is as much as to say, that they went to Assur to seek help, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 like a solitary wild man, who goes alone by himself with∣out counsel. The ground of his expression is taken out of Gen. 16.12. where it is said of Israel that he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pere Adam, i. e. c 1.272 ferus homo, as some render, a wild man. But this makes no great difference, in as much as the title given to the man seems taken only from his likeness to that beast, as if we should say, d 1.273 a wild ass of a man, that is, one in some conditions like him; and so the proper signification is still respect had to; and so here, whether there be understood the beast, or a man resembling him: and that which is here at present to be observed is, that Israel is the person by him looked on as compared in these words to the one of them, which ever you mean.

We may here joyn with these whom we have mentioned, the LXX also, in this regard that they take these words as containing a description of Israels condition, and refer them to him, though otherwise in giving the meaning of the words they altogether differ, rendring it, e 1.274 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ephra∣im hath flourished by, or, to himself; and so the printed Arabic following them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim hath been fruitful in himself, i. e. according to Ciril, thinking so to do 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, without me, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The ground of which their rendring appears to be, that they took 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pere, which signifies a wild ass, and is elsewhere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 H, to have the significati∣on here of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Parah, which signifies to fructifie, or be fruitful. But why (if the read∣ing would bear it) they should choose to put that meaning in this place, I do not know, nor find any good account given, and we have no reason to follow it, or to depart from that which we see is generally followed: and we have no farther use at present of their authority, then in that they thought these words, however they rendred them, to be spoken of Israel, and to describe them, as those others whom we have hitherto named, (we see) do think, and that, I suppose, with good reason. So that the words are to be un∣derstood as our ancienter English, called the Geneva, renders with some supply, they are gone up to Assyria, they are as a wild ass &c. whereas our later and now followed trans∣lation, rendring only what the Hebrew hath, without any supply, they are gone up to Assur, a wild ass alone by himself, leave the matter more ambiguous. For as the fore∣mentioned Versions and Expositions refer the words to Israel, as the persons compared to a wild ass; so are there others, and those not a few, of very good authority, who think not Israel who went up, but Assur to whom they went up, to be the person. So Junius and f 1.275 Tremellius render, Quia isti ascer∣derunt ad Assyrium onagrum solummodo studen∣tem sibi, Because they are gone up to the Assy∣rian, who is a wild ass minding only himself; so Piscator, so Pareus, so Grotius, and Diodati, and Bochartus.

They that take Israel to be the person spo∣ken of, must look upon them as so compared because of their being stubborn, heady, self-will'd, and because refusing to be ruled and directed by Gods law and his counsel, that so they might find in his service safety and protection from him at home, ran of their own heads g 1.276 after the Assyrians, hoping to obtain at any rate help from them for up∣holding them in their idolatrous course: or else, as others will, and which is necessarily consequent on the former, because of the danger, that by forsaking God to follow their own wicked extravagant ways, and being therefore forsaken by him, they necessarily cast themselves into, as the wild Ass by run∣ning up and down alone by himself in the wilderness makes himself oft a prey to the Lion, (as was above said) or some such ra∣venous beast. And so some take it as a pu∣nishment

of Israel, for their going up to Assyria to seek help, viz. that remanebit solus sine auxilio Assyriorum & Dei, they should be left alone without help from either the Assyrians or God.

They that look upon them as a description of Assur, to whom they went to seek for help, take him to be to that beast likened, be∣cause of his savage and untractable nature, that was not to be wrought upon to be kind or helpful to any, but looked only after his own advantage without regard to others; h 1.277 Cui non magis curae sunt homines ut ipsos ad∣juvet, quam onagro &c, who hath no more care of men to help them, than a wild ass hath, which is spoken of Job 39.8. &c. but i 1.278 only takes care of himself, as Junius. Assyrius dicitur ona∣ger sibi pascens, quod sui solius negotia gereret, alias gentes non curaret, as Grotius. Which ever way be taken, as the Hebrew will well bear both, it declares the brutishness and evi∣dent folly of Israel, who for k 1.279 observing lying vanities forsake their own mercy, and leaving those ways which were both profita∣ble and safe, put themselves in such in which was no profit, and would necessarily prove pernicious to them, besides the present trouble, viz. while they leave God, and seek to Assur. Which their folly is also farther described in the next words, from the cost they put themselves to therein, Ephraim hath hired lovers, (or, as in the margin, loves.)

The words in the Hebrew are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hithnu ahabim, the first of which is usually looked on as having two significations; the first that here in our translation given it, viz. to hire with a gift, or reward given; the se∣cond, to discourse, or talk with, or of, as at the beginning of the next v. we shall have oc∣casion farther to mention. In the first the Verb doth not, for what we find, occur else∣where in Scripture but in this Prophet, and that only here and in the next words, but the Noun l 1.280 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ethnah, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ethnan, from the same root, is often found, and taken properly to signifie, a gift, or m 1.281 reward gi∣ven to a whore and for dishonest purposes; and so therefore may this Verb seem to differ from n 1.282 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nathan, with which it hath affi∣nity in that that signifies more generally to give, but this more particularly, to give some such gift for evil purpose, as we said; and so will include, as couched in the word, here another comparison of lewd Israel, who were before (if the words be understood, as we said, of them) compared to a wild ass gad∣ding about, as led by his lust or other desires, and now, to an unsatiable whorish woman, who not content with her husband, or forsak∣ing him, even with gifts hireth others to come to her, and bestow their love upon her. A like comparison we have Ezek. 16.33, 34. where in describing the wickedness of Jeru∣salem he saith, They give gifts to all whores, but thou givest thy gifts to all thy lovers &c. and the contrary is in thee from other women in thy whoredoms, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Betitteca ethnan, in that thou givest Ethnan (the word we speak of) a reward 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veethnan lo nittan lac, and no reward is given unto thee. This Israel are here likewise taxed for, in that like such a lewd woman by giving gifts hiring others to love her, they forsaking God whom, as by covenant of marriage, they ought faithfully to have adhered to, and on whom alone to have depended, they sought by gifts and presents to make friends of the Assyrians, or others, to help them in their idolatrous courses and rebellions against him, and so put themselves to that charge (as sinners usually do) in the service of sin, which in Gods service they need not to have been at. This he calls their hiring of lovers, or, (as in the margin ours put) o 1.283 loves, the word be∣ing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahabim, which properly signi∣fies, loves. But it is a known kind of speak∣ing, to take such Nouns as denote some qua∣lity, either for the subject or object in whom they are, or to whom directed, actively, or passively; and so loves may be, as the sense requireth, taken for such as are p 1.284 loved, or for q 1.285 lovers, and in this last way doth the Vulgar Latin and other Latin Versions take it. It will be all one whether of them be taken, their love being that which is sought, and the persons sought to for their love. And so Kimchi, retaining the proper signification of that word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He saith that Ephraim hired loves with Egypt and Assyria; they gave them gifts (or bribes) that they might be in their covenant and their love, (or in league and friendship with them.) This seems a plain exposition of the words, according to that meaning which ours (whether in the Text or Margin) and most Latin Translaions give, and we may well embrace it. Yet there are o∣thers different. AbuWalid, and R. Tanchum, accurate Grammarians, so render it, as to

make 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahabim, loves, to be, not the thing that they hired, but the hire or price that they gave for obtaining what they de∣sired from those to whom they gave it, lea∣ving that to be understood, as help, and suc∣cour, or favour, or the like. So the first of them in his Dictionary, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. I take the meaning to be, They have bestowed their love on the Assyrians, and given it to them; and the other in this place the like: which as to the scope is much the same with the former way, only making the Verb to signifie, to give for hire, that which in that is, to hire, and the Noun to denote the price, which in that is made the thing for which the price is given. A∣barbinei much agrees with them in the ex∣pounding it, They have given gifts and presents to the King of Assyria by way of (or in token of) love. The MS. Arabie goes not far from it, at least as to the meaning of the latter word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahubim, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim have returned (or renewed) loves. I suppose he means, have turned again to love them whom they formerly loved, after they left them, as by his rendring the beginning of the next verse will appear. As for the rendring the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hithnu by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they have returned again, reiterated, he seems to have taken it from a signification which the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thanah hath not, I think, in the Hebrew, but in the Chaldee and Arabic hath, viz. iteravit, secundo fecit, to reiterate, to do a second time, or repeat, which in the Hebrew would be written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shanah with the let∣ter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shin, which in those tongues is usually changed into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Th.r 1.286

The Chaldee goes something wider from the ordinary way, paraphrasing it, Israel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are delivered into the hand of the people whom they have loved. Cappel conjectures, that he read Huttenu, as from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nathan, to give, which should sig∣nifie, they have been given, instead of Hith∣nu, they have given. But the learned s 1.287 Buxtorf considering that Huttan is a form not found in the Heb. Bible, rejects that conjecture, as thinking that he should rather have thought them to have read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nittenu, they are gi∣ven, but thinks that also needless, and that taking the liberty of a Paraphrast he so rendred it, looking on the words as sounding, They have given Ephraim to his loves, or lovers, which, in not an unknown way of ex∣pression, will be as much as, Ephraim is gi∣ven up (by God) to his lovers, i. e. into their hands: or may we not think that this Para∣phrast Jonathan looked on this to be the scope of the words as they literally sound? their giving presents to those whose love they would thereby purchase, being a sign or argument that they were given now already up into their power, and the Presents which they gave them being as tokens of their homage and subje∣ction by them acknowledged and yielded to them, and by him therefore to that purpose by his paraphrastical liberty expressed.

The LXX go yet another way, changing the order of the words, and turning the Verb into a Noun, and the Noun into a Verb, and rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, have loved gifts; which the printed Arabic also follow, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Syriac also in this place, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which makes t 1.288 some think that for Hithno they read Hithno, and that to stand for Hith∣noth, gifts, and then to have read for Ahabim, loves, Ohebim, loving, or do love, viz. in the Participle. But I know not by what autho∣rity but of mere conjecture this may be said. If we should make any thing a little irregular, it would come nearer the words to think that they took Hithnu for the Imperative mood, which regularly would be Hathnu, and then Ahabim, as the Participle, Ohebim, that so the words might sound, they love give ye, or retaining it as a Noun, give ye, loves, (or is their loves,) which then would agree with what we read above, c. 4.18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A∣habu hebu, they love, give ye, i. e. they love gifts; or else taking the words in their usual and proper signification, by a little different distinguishing and construction, may the same meaning be drawn from them, They have given gifts; loves, i. e. if they hear that any have or will give gifts or bribes, these are that which they love. But this is harsh, and their sense any way made out not well agreeing to the place; Israels condition being at that time such, as that they should rather give gifts to obtain love and friendship, or help from others, than that they should expect that any others should give to them, and we therefore look on the first exposition, which agrees to our translation, as the plainest and clearest: according to which the whole verse shews the pains and costs that they were at in seeking for help, either from the Assyrians, or the Egptians, or their Idols, which v 1.289 some will have also to be understood; and how in vain were all the pains they took, or costs they were at in so doing, the next words declare.

v. 10. Yea, though they have hired among the nations, now will I gather them,

and they shall sorrow a little for the burden of the Kings of Princes.

Very different are the rendrings and ex∣positions which are by Interpreters given of this verse. To take the words in order, the first are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gam ci yithnu baggoim, by ours rendred, yea though they have hired among the nations. The two first Particles, Gam ci, are rendred by ours, yea though, and alike by others, etiam si, although, which that they so joyned signifie elsewhere also, w 1.290 there is no doubt, as below c. 9.16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gam ci yeledun, yea though they bring forth; and Is. 1.15. where ours render it, yea when, which is all one with, yea though, and might as well be so there read as here, and is in the Geneva English, and though; and with this is well agreeing here in the Vulgar Latin, sed & cum, and there, & cum, yea and when. It may be also well rendred, also because, and is so by x 1.291 some rendred. These two rendrings agree in this, that they shew a necessary con∣sequence of what is after said shall follow on what is here said they did; though the first make the necessity of the consequence of it from the invalidity and unprofitableness of what they did for prevention sake; though they hoped by doing what they did to prevent it, it shall be in vain; for though they do this, hoping thereby to secure them∣selves, yet, now will I gather them &c. the second, from its being as a necessary conse∣quent, or effect and issue of what they do, viz. because they do thus (hire among the nations,) therefore now will I gather them, &c. y 1.292 Others render them, Etiam quasi, yea they have as it were hired &c. so making it as a farther ag∣gravation of the sin in the foregoing words objected to them, by specifying those lovers from whom they hired loves, viz. that they were the nations or heathen people. It was a great sin to distrust God, and forsaking him to seek help from any other, but greater yet to seek it from the heathen nations. But I do not conceive this to be so proper a mean∣ing or rendring, as either of the former. If it be followed, I should rather like this meaning of it, which z 1.293 one suggests in his Paraphrase of the words, They have as it were hired the nations against themselves.

The next word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yithnu, being the Fu∣ture tense of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hithnu, which imme∣diately before precedes, is by ours as by most others rendred in the same signification of hiring, viz. that they might come and help them, but it is by some otherwise rendred. We before said that it sometimes signifies, to recite, publish, or declare; and by that notion would a 1.294 R. Tanchum have it here expressed, though otherwise in the preceding words. His words for explication of it are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall re∣port what condition they had been in, and what afterwards had befallen them; word for word, Narrabunt in quo fuerunt, & quid deinde fuerit ipsis; except his meaning should be,

Though they brag of what they found among the nati∣ons, and how it was there with them;

for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is also there. His words seem not clear, but I suppose his meaning is, That though or when they running abroad to the nations should report among them what they had formerly been in their prosperity, and what case they were now in, seeking thereby to move them to help them, this should not profit or secure them, but he would do to∣ward them what in the following words he saith he will do. He saith that others make the meaning to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, viz. passively, though they be talked of, i. e. be a talk, (except we should render it, they, i. e. men, shall talk of them,) though they be the subject of talk among the nations, where they have dispersed them∣selves for making known their condition, seek∣ing help: this is yet less clear.

The LXX likewise give here a different signification to the word, from what they gave in the former v. even that of being de∣livered up, which the Chaldee there gave to it, rendring, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, therefore shall they be delivered up among the nations. So the printed Arabic, following them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, For this shall they be delivered to the nations: The Syriac also as to the signification of the Verb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Though they shall be delivered up among the nations; as to the signification of the Verb, I say, but there is difference between them as to the rendring of the Particles, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gam ci, the one ren∣dring, therefore, the other, although, which makes a great difference in the sense: there∣fore, making it a description of what should

befall them as a punishment for what they had been before said to do; the other giving to expect what might be contrary to their ex∣pectation in the condition they were, or should be in, though &c. yet now will I &c. b 1.295 Some think the Greek therefore to have read here in the Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not for Yith∣nu, but for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yuttenu, in a Passive from, from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nathun, in the Conju∣gation Hophal, which elsewere occurs. Whe∣ther they might so do, or what signification or use they thought the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thanah, from which Yithnu (as now read) is, to have, which moved them to render it Passively, as some c 1.296 Verbs of Active form are sometimes used, I shall not now enquire; let it suffice to have set down what they give.

The MS. Arabic here retains the same sig∣nification which it gave to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hithnu, in the preceding v. but paraphrastically renders it, inserting words, thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Also when they shall turn again their love to Egypt, and shall be among the companies, or nations, now will I gather them &c. taking it seems, as their going to Assur was mentio∣ned in the foregoing v. so here to be meant their going to Egypt to seek help, and set∣ting their affections on them. The Chaldee paraphraseth it, If Israel would set my fear in their hearts, &c. he seems to take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yith∣nu for, to give, or put, the rest he adds. But our chief intention is to find out a stricter meaning of the words; and among such as give that, none seem better to do it than our translation, which seems to make (as we have already intimated) this sense, in which some of the Jews also concur, viz. (to give it in Abarbinel's words) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

Though they shall make conditions with the Kings of the Nations, and give to them gifts, [viz. for making them their friends, and hiring their love,] yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all this shall not d 1.297 profit them, nor secure them from Gods hand and punishment.

For, as in the next words he saith, he will ga∣ther them.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Attah akabbetsem, now will I gather them; about which words is likewise no small difference betwixt Expositors. For our better discerning and judging of which, it will be convenient in the first place to take no∣tice of the signification of the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Akabbets, rendred, I will gather. The Root signifies in general, to gather, but according to the end for which those that are gathered are so gathered, it may be so used as to de∣note either e 1.298 good or f 1.299 bad thereby intended to them, being indifferently appliable to either kind, and is therefore here by some taken in the one way, by others in the other.

The Particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Attah, now, put be∣fore it, will signifie the speedy performance of what is said shall be done, or the certainty of it g 1.300 in its due time, what is by God deter∣mined to be done, being with him and in his determination as present. But the Verb hath a Suffix joyned to it, viz. the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 m, which is the Pronoun of the third person plu∣ral singifying, them, the applying of which to the persons that it is referred to, is the occasion of such difference as we find among Expositors; while some will have it referred to Israel who went unto the Nations, others to the Nations, h 1.301 whether Assyrians, Egypti∣ans, or others to whom they went, the con∣struction admitting both. First therefore some by, them, understand the Nations by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Goyim, immediately prece∣ding, meant; among whom, according to our Translation, and those many others with which it agrees, it is said, they hired lovers, or loves; so that the meaning may be, That when they shall think themselves secured by their leagues made with them, they shall find themselves much deceived in their policy, for now, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ere long, or speedily, will I gather, even those very Nations against them, not for their help, as they thought they had procured them to be, but for their de∣struction, as if for that end they had been hired, and to execute Gods upon them, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to carry them captives: so among the Jews Kimchi and Abarbinel, and among i 1.302 Christians, several. And this may be illu∣strated by what is said Ezek. 16.37. when God threatens Jerusalem, that he will gather all her lovers, and all them that she had loved, &c. round against her, &c.

But this exposition seemes something to trouble and interrupt the construction and the connexion of these words with the preceding and following, by change of the Persons to whom the Pronouns are referred, by re∣ferring (they) to Israel; secondly here, them, to the Assyrians, or such other nations as they dealt withall; and then thirdly, they, a∣gain to Israel; whereas they would run with an k 1.303 evener tenor, if they were all referred to the same persons. And so therefore do l 1.304 others refer them all to the Israelites, they hire &c. and I will gather them, and they shall sorrow &c. What is meant then in this way,

by his saying, Now will I gather them. Whence? whither? for what end? Accor∣ding to the Chaldee Paraphrast the answer would be, From the places in which they were dispersed to their own land, there to do good unto them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From among the nations I will bring near (or back) their captivity, but he puts not this as an absolute promise, but on condi∣tion that they would have his fear in their hearts, as we have before seen his way of in∣terpretation. But R. Salomo takes it as an absolute promise for good to them, expoun∣ding the words to this purpose, Although they have done this, that they have hired loves among the nations, now will I gather them, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When the time of their redemption is come I will not regard it.

If this were the sense of these words, I should think R. Tanchum's exposition of the former better to agree with them, viz. al∣though they be dispersed abroad among the nations, discoursing of their former condition, and condoling that which they are fallen to, yet now will I again gather them and restore them. That seems more to agree with this latter clause inferred from that former, than, although they have hired, &c. But I think nei∣ther of them well to agree to the scope of the words here, which seems manifestly to require that they be understood, not as a promise of good, but a m 1.305 threat of evil to them.

Calvin doth also set down a way, in which they may be understood of good; as that though they by running about among the na∣tions to get their love, and find from them help and assistance, did disperse themselves, and expose themselves to danger and destru∣ction, yet he would gather them, i. e. with∣hold or detain them for a while from that total destruction which they would pull on them∣selves; and that for that end which in the fol∣lowing words is shewed. But he mentions an∣other way of exposition also, in which the words are a threat of evil to them; as name∣ly, that though they had gone abroad and hired forces and succours, yet he would ga∣ther them together as into an heap for a general destruction to them, which he saith will well agree with the words: and to some∣thing to that purpose are they for the most part expounded, by those who by them do understand Ephraim, or Israel. I will gather them in Egypt, saith Aben Ezra, but gives nothing more for explaining of his meaning. I suppose he hath respect to what is said v. 13. They shall return into Egypt, and c. 9.6. Egypt shall gather thom, Memphis shall bury them. I will gather them, ut simul vincti abducantur, that they being bound may be led away together cap∣tives, saith Mercer. So that this gathering of them under the hand of n 1.306 one conquerour, is but o 1.307 for farther dispersion, p 1.308 ut vinctos simui abducam, & postca inter gentes dispergam, that I may lead them away bound together, and after disperse them among the nations. q 1.309 Others to the same purpose; I will gather them together into Samaria, and their other cities, where they shall think to stand on their defence, that so they may be there taken all together, and led captives by their enemies. I will gather them, saith another late r 1.310 learned man, in sepulchrum, into the grave, viz. interimam eos, I will slay or destroy them. These all of this last way look, as we said, on the words as a commination of evil to Israel.

We shall better yet judge of these ways, when we shall have seen and considered the following words, what is the meaning of them, and so how they will stand in connexion with these. They are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veachellu meat mimmassa melec sarim. which ours render, And they shall sorrow a lit∣tle for the burden of the King of Princes, but in the margin, instead of, shall sorrow, put, begin; which shews, that they looked on that word as having some difficulty in it, by reason of different significations that it is capable of, and were in doubt which to take. And that indeed occasions great variety of expositions among Interpreters, some referring the word to one root, some to another of different notions; and then differently applying in particular the following words, burden, King, Princes, though agreeing in the general signification of them.

As first we have that which is by many followed, and by ours put in the text, they shall sorrow, &c. In this way it is taken to be as from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chul, which signifies among other things, to grieve, to sorrow, and to fear, &c. And the Verb being so taken, and the following words joyned with it, the ex∣position is given by s 1.311 some, (taking it for granted that the Israelites complained and were grieved for the t 1.312 taxes or tribute which they were burthened with by their King and Princes, (as v 1.313 some will have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Melec Sarim, King Princes, to be understood as if it were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vesarim, King and Prin∣ces, by understanding the Copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve) which were imposed on them that they might buy peace from the King of Princes, as others will have the words to sound, viz. the King of Assyria, who had many Kings and Princes

under him) that when God should gather them, (or the nations against them, as some) they should sorrow a little, i. e. but a little for the burden at present imposed on them by their King and Princes, or the King of Prin∣ces, viz. it should then seem but a light mat∣ter to them, though they now looked on it as a grievous burden, in respect to what they should for the future suffer from the people amongst whom they should be hereafter cap∣tives, scorned, derived, afflicted, and oppres∣sed by them; those greater evils should make them look on this burden as small and light. Abarbinel's words are plain to this purpose.

I will now gather the nations against them to carry them captives; and whereas they are now much grieved for the burden of the King and Princes, which was imposed on them, behold then they shall sorrow and be grieved but a little for this, because their captivity shall be then heavy upon them, so far as that the burden of the King and Prin∣ces, which they sustained while they were in their own land, shall be in their eyes a small and little matter in respect to the affliction of their captivity; for so is the nature of the world, that while a man is at quiet, any little tribute which he pays seems heavy to him, but when affliction and distress comes upon him, then will that tribute, which he was before subject to, seem in his eyes but a light matter.

The word being taken in that signification, it may also according to Calvin be expoun∣ded, They shall sorrow a little for the burden of the King and Princes, i. e. they being ga∣thered, or yet restrained, shall become w 1.314 tri∣butaries before they be carried away captives. This, saith he, is meant by that sorrowing a lit∣tle, and, according to his explication, this was in mercy, that by this punishment and lighter cause of sorrow he might bring them to a sense of their sins, and to turn to him by repentance for preventing their greater calamities and utter destruction, if they would have made that use of it. Castalio ta∣king also this signification of the Verb, yet by a differing construction of the following words with, it gives this rendring of the whole clause, Ego per gentes jam ita eos cogam, ut parum doleant prae Regis fato Proceres, I will so gather them by (or among) the nations, that the Princes (or Nobles) shall grieve but a little in respect to what shall befall the King, i. e. as he explains his own words, will punish them so as that the King shall undergo much grea∣ter punishment than the Nobles. But if the words be so placed in construction, why might they not be rendred, x 1.315 and the Princes shall grieve a little for (or by reason of) the burden (or imposition) of the King. R. Salomo some∣thing differently from any of these, they shall be humbled a little in their captivity, through the fear of the burden of the King and Princes; viz. the yoke of the Kings of the Nations.

In the second place, others take the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachellu in the signification of resting, or ceasing. So the Vulgar Latin, Quiescent paulisper ab onere Regis & Principum, which in the Doway English is, and they shall rest a while from the burden of the King and the Prin∣ces. The Syriac also in the same manner, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The LXX also as to the signification of the Verb, though in the other words differing, while they render, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which reading is confirmed by the printed Arabic, which hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall rest a little to anoint, y 1.316 or that they may anoint, or, as others, from anoint∣ing, a King and Princes. Otherwise z 1.317 some conjecture they wrote, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they shall cease, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they shall labour, And as for the following words it is an easie conje∣jecture to think, that for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mimmassa, from the burden, they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mimsho∣ach, from anointing. Yet perhaps they did not read so, but only put in mind by the neerness of the words in writing, they chose so to ex∣press what they thought meant by that bur∣den; viz. the trouble that they were at in those tumultuous times, (as appears in the hi∣story) by the often change of Kings, in put∣ting down one and setting up another, who tyrannically ruled, and imposed on them hea∣vy taxes and burdens; which seems to fall in with the expression of the Chaldee Paraphrast, which is, If they would but be wise a 1.318 a little, I would take away from them the tyranny of Kings and Princes.

b 1.319 Some think that those who take the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachellu in this signification, look upon it as derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yichel, which is, ex∣pectare, quiescere, to stay, and to rest, and that they do therein better than they who derive it from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chul. But there is no necessity of saying so; for besides that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachellu, with the letter doubled by the point Dagesh, may more probably be deduced from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chul, in the Future of the Conju∣gation Hiphil, than it can from any thing which is from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachal, (and is

by c 1.320 some referred to it, with some reasons given for the little irregularity of it by rea∣son of that d 1.321 point, which regularly should shew it to be from a root in which the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is doubled, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chalal,) it is mani∣fest, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hechil, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hechel in Hi∣phil, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chul, from which this must, according to those that refer it to that root, be, and the root it self in Kal, or the first Conjugation, doth signifie, to stay, and to rest, as well as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachal doth: as for exam∣ple, Gen. 8.10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And he stayed (or rested) yet other seven days, which e 1.322 Kimchi refers to this root; and in this Pro∣phecy, c. 11.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, And the sword shall abide, or rest upon.

To the same sense with these doth R. Tan∣chum also expound it, and that so as to take away that little scruple which is made by reason of that point which we speak of, reading 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yachellu, with a double l, and referring it to the Theme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chalal, from which most regularly it seems to be, and ta∣king that in the signification of easing, loosing, or having rest, near unto that notion which it hath, Num. 30.2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He shall not loosen or slack his word, which ours render, he shall not break his word, that so it may signi∣fie the same as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Halla doth in Arabic, which doth signifie, solvere, to loosen, untie, or slack, (and, which would well fit our purpose here, to remain, and, to rest;) so that he ex∣pounds the words here, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall loosen and make light (or easie) that which is now upon them of the weight of the im∣position of the King and Princes, which now they do exact from them, or, which is now exacted from them. The scope of his words seems plain∣ly the same with that which we were speak∣ing of, Quiescent paulisper ab onere regis & principum, they shall rest a little while from the burden of the King and Princes.

Of the words so rendred Grotius gives the meaning thus:

They complained greatly of those burdens which the Kings of Israel and their officers imposed on them, and there∣fore slew those Kings and their officers; but I will bring it to pass, that they shall no more pay any thing to those Kings or offi∣cers; to wit, when they shall live in a servile condition in the Assyrians countreys: and what he saith, they shall rest a little, is spoken by way of derision; for that condition which is here foretold, should long continue.

Je∣rom's exposition is,

Because they love to give presents to their enemies, therefore for a little while they shall obtain this benefit, that they shall not pay taxes to the King and Princes till they come among the Assyrians, where they shall no more pay tribute and taxes as free-men, but shall be brought in∣to the extremest servitude. Lyra: They shall rest a little from the burden of the King of the Assyrians, in whose Kingdom they shall be oppressed with hard servitude:

f 1.323 as if he should say, The rest which they now enjoy, in that they do not yet serve the King of Assyria, shall last but a little while, for the time of their captivity is at hand. Another: g 1.324

They shall rest indeed a little by the benefit of the bur∣den or tribute which the Kings Manahem and Osee by the counsel of the Princes impo∣sed on the Israelites, to redeem them from the molestation of the Assyrians, but this rest shall not endure long; for shortly they shall with new wars be assailed, overwhelmed, and cut off by them.

h 1.325 Others,

They shall rest a little, they shall be lead into captivity, where they shall now no more have their natural Kings and Princes, to whom they may pay their tribute as they were wont to do, but yet they shall have imperious Lords, by whom they shall be more grievously burden∣ed.

I shall not stand to confer these expo∣sitions between themselves, because I know not how far either of them is to be followed.

In the third place the Verb viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ya∣chellu, is taken by many in that signification which ours have in the Margin, that is of, beginning, that so it may be from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chalal, to which alone Aben Ezra saith it can regularly be referred, from which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hechel, the Future of which this is, is, to begin and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Techillah, a beginning; so that the words will then literally sound, and they shall begin, (or, have began, as the Future form may be indifferently rendred, especially with the Particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, conversive as well as copulative prefixed) from, or for, or because of, the burden of the King of Princes, or King and Princes. But this is but an imperfect speech, and therefore necessarily requires some other Verb to be supplied or understood, by which may be declared what they shall be∣gin, or have began, to do, and so is by Ex∣positors, i 1.326 using their liberty, accordingly un∣derstood and supplied. Some understand, to com∣plain, and to murmur. So Aben Ezra, Then shall they begin to murmur and complain for the burden of the Kings of Egypt and Assyria, and their princes

And so Kimchi; Now shortly will I gather a∣gainst them the nations to carry them captives, but that in the beginning (or first place) they shall murmur and complain for the burden of the King and Princes, viz. of the nations, who should im∣pose upon them the mulct of tribute. Others to the same purpose, k 1.327 premi, to be oppressed; they shall begin a little, ab onere regis & principum pre∣mi, to be pressed by the burden of the King and princes. Munster agreeing to the literal con∣struction, yet turns the meaning thus;

Both the King and Princes shall begin a little to burden them, viz. before their captivity, with exactions and taxes.

l 1.328 Others, liberi esse, to be free from the burden of the Kings of Assyria and his Princes: for they shall cease a while from paying his tribute, trusting in help from the King of Egypt. These render as in the Future tense, others taking it in the Pretertense make also like supplies, and they have, or, yea already they have begun, i. e. other nations whom I will gather against them, m 1.329 infesti esse, to be troublesome to them, by the tribute which they shall exact of them; understanding that which Shalmaneser imposed on Hoshea, 2 Kin. 17.3. n 1.330 or, to be gathered together to re∣quire the hire promised to them for their help, so making the Nominative case governing the Verb to be the enemies. But others gene∣rally make the Israelites spoken of to be the Nominative case, and the persons which are said to have began, and supply, o 1.331 some, mertede conducere, to hire such as should help them against the Assyrians, as King Hoshea did the Egyptians, 2 Kin. 17.4. Others, p 1.332 li∣beri esse, or, quiescere, yea they have began to be free, or to rest, from the burden &c. q 1.333 o∣thers, queri, or gravari, and they have already begun to complain or be grieved by reason of &c. or, r 1.334 the Princos have a little begun to assemble themselves, and to complain of the burden of the King, i. e. the King of Assyria. These seem to have taken the ground of their supplies from those others significations which are by others given to the Verb, of sorrowing, grie∣ving, resting, &c. which we have seen, and accordingly will the meaning be made out, as it is by them. Others taking another way will have the signification of the preceding word, I will gather them, to be repeated; yea they have already began to be gathered, i. e. as Tremellius, coerceri, to be restrained, namely, by the burden of the taxes, by their King and Princes laid upon them for the paying of tri∣bute to strangers; though this be but a little in respect of greater burdens or evils that shall follow: or, as Ludovicus de Dieu, to much the same purpose, and they have began a little, nem∣pe colligi in sepulchrum, sive interimi, to be ga∣thered into the grave, or, to be destroyed, ab one∣re regis principum, quo nempe pressit eos rex As∣syriorum, from (or, by reason of) the burden of the King of of Princes, to wit that with which the King of Assyria hath oppressed them. This last supply seems to come nearer the matter and the words than the other; yet is there another way, looking so on this Verb as de∣noting, coeperunt, which makes no need of any supply at all, and gives a good meaning, which is by taking the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meat, which all the rest look on as an Adverb, sig∣nifying, a little, or, for a little while or time, not so, but as an Infinitive mood, from the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Maat. which signifies, to be little, to be made little, or lessened, to be diminished, in the Form of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Melac, Gen. 36.31. that so the words may sound, yea they have began to be lessened, or diminished, or destroyed, by reason of &c. This in the sense falls much in with the last foregoing, viz. that of L. de Dieu, and will be confirmed by the MS. Arabick trans∣lation of the words, which hath (as in the copy which I have use of, it is written in He∣brew characters) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which in Arabick would be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and literally sound, And (or, yea) they have began, they have been (or, began to be) lessened (or, di∣minished) from (or, by reason of) the burden of the King of Princes.

Thus have I set down at large what expo∣sitions I find given of these words, and what at present I can think, yet could wish to find something clearer than what I have yet found. It seems to me a place of no small difficulty.

v. 11. Because Ephraim hath made many altars to sin, altars shall be unto him to sin.

As Israel's folly, as well as their wicked∣ness, was in the former words declared, in that, forsaking God, they sought and placed their confidence in help from men, which their confidence should prove not only vain, but occasion of much mischief to them; so is it farther in these, in that they thought to se∣cure themselves by their great shews and pretences of religion and devotion in a false way; which is comprehended under the ex∣pression of making many altars. Great was their folly in thinking this should be for good to them, whereas it was indeed for multiplying and aggravating their sin, and increasing of it, and provoking justly God to send greater pu∣nishments on them; and their so doing cleared

his justice in infflicting them.

That we may better conceive the meaning of these words, and judge of such expositions of them as we shall meet with, it may be convenient to observe as concerning the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lachato, which is twice repea∣ted, and in both places rendred, to sin, that as the root properly signifies, s 1.335 to sin, so it comprehends the notion of expiating sin also, and of punishment also for sin; so that if any in their expositions shall have respect to either of these, it may not seem strange or to be from the purpose.

To look then on what is to be said as to the meaning: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, because. So that Particle properly signifies, and so directs to the conne∣xion of these words with what hath gone before, according to what we have already said, and manifests that there is evident cause why God should threaten to them such things as he doth. t 1.336 Some render it, certè, certainly, or assuredly, as a Particle of asseveration. So the MS. Arabic perhaps took it, rendring it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which if we read it Enna, will be on∣ly a Particle of affirmation, certainly, or the like; yet may it be read, Anna, and then it will signifie in that other way, because, or else, En si, if, If they multiply altars to sin, altars shall be for sin to them. This will make no dif∣ference, only that thereby in the first way, if rendred, certainly, the truth of both clauses is asserted by themselves, that they did mul∣tiply altars to sin, and that altars should be to them to sin; whereas in the other ways the former is made a cause of the latter, because they did multiply altars to sin, therefore altars should be to them to sin.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hirbah Ephraim mizbechoth lachato, Ephraim hath multiplied altars to sin: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They of the house of Ephraim, saith the Chaldee. That tribe seems peculiarly named, because the first author of such idolatrous doings as are spoken of, was of that tribe; namely Jeroboam, who made Israel to sin in that kind; and they, as having the first King, were looked on as chief among the ten which united to make a distinct Kingdom from Judah; yet, as oft before, un∣der it look we on as comprehended the others that joyned with it, and so Ephraim to be as much as to say, Israel, as distinguished from Judah, hath multiplied altars to sin. It may seem harsh to say, that they did it for that end that they might purposely sin; they would rather say, they did it for a religious end, that they might thereon offer sacrifices u 1.337 for the expiation of their sins and appeas∣ing of God. But whatever they might pre∣tend in so doing, they did that which to do was necessarily to sin, God having instituted and ordered only w 1.338 one Altar, and that now at his own temple in Jerusalem, on which those sacrifiees, which he would be pleased with, and accept of, were to be offered. To make Al∣tars at their own pleasure, and offer on them sacrifices under what pretence soever, was to sin, and openly to rebel against him in trans∣gressing against his commandments and rules, by himself prescribed for his worship; so that the words will necessarily bear this sense, That in Ephraim to multiply Altars was to sin, even to multiply sin, one sin drawing on another; and seeing they did that which was a necessary occasion of sinning, God, as in the last clause, would impute it to them as a great sin.

So it follows in the next clause, Altars shall be to them to sin. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hayu lo mizbechoth lachato, which, word for word, sounds, Altars have been to him to sin, which seems to give at first hearing this meaning; The Altars which they have multiplied have accor∣dingly had that effect, and been occasion to them of sinning. For the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hayu, is indeed of the form of the Preterperfect tense, signi∣fying, they have been, yet it is by Interpreters differently translated, not only by that, but by some in the Present tense, * 1.339 sunt, are, and by others, as by ours, in the Future, erunt, shall be, (as not unusually that tense is put for ei∣ther of those, as the sense requires;) and this difference in rendring, though it make no great difference in the meaning, yet some it doth, giving us to look on those Altars not only as a necessary cause of their committing sin, but that the so multiplying of them was a great sin, and should for such be imputed to them. So the learned Mr. Lively, in majorem condem∣nationem & reatum ei cedent, shall be for greater condemnation and guilt to them. As of Jeroboam's setting up the golden Calves, it is said the 1 Ki. 12.30. this thing became a sin, and c. 13.34. and of his setting up the lowest of the people to be Priests, and this thing became a sin unto the house of Jeroboam, even to cut it off, and to destroy it. So should to these, the Altars that they multiplied, and thought perhaps in themselves to be a supererogatory work of devotion, be imputed for sin, a great unpar∣donable sin. The repeating the word in both clauses seems to import an aggravation, and to shew that it was looked on as no ordinary sin, and that x 1.340 their wickedness was thereby come to a great height. With this interpre∣tation seems to suit the Syriac Version, though

retaining in the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hayu the Preter∣perfect tense, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because E∣phraim hath multiplied altars to sin, (or for sin,) and (or therefore) altars have been to him for a great sin: adding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Rabo, great, which is not in the Original.

This last clause y 1.341 others something different∣ly interpret; therefore altars shall be to them to sin, i. e. because they multiply to them∣selves such occasions of sin, therefore will I give them up to go on in their wicked ways, and to sin more and more in them; so mak∣ing sin a punishment of sin in them, and that which they had sinned in, a cause and occasion of farther sin in them, till their measure were full, and judgment should take hold on them. And what more grievous could be threatned to them than that thus he would withdraw his grace from them, and give them up z 1.342 to a re∣probate mind to commit idolatry with gree∣diness, and still to continue it? What can be the issue but utter destruction?

There is another way in which most of the a 1.343 Jewish expositors consent, making the words to be an exaggeration of their sin, in that they did not only continue to imitate the sins of their predecessors, but did even strive to out-do them in framing to themselves new occasions of adding thereto. Aben Ezra makes the import of them to be this:

They had Altars which they had received as by inhe∣ritance from their fathers; why did they yet multiply them? Kimchi also: They have multiplied Altars beyond those that their fathers made, as Ahab, who added to Jeroboam's Calves Baal and a Grove, and what had they to multiply and adde, where they had already Altars, but only that they might adde to their sin? Abarbinel something plainer: All this (to wit which was threatned) shall be, because Ephraim hath multiplied Altars to sin, as much as to say, Ephraim continually multiplied (or added) to make new high places and Altars for Idol-worship, although he had already from his fathers Altars to sin; but he was not contented with those Altars which he received from his fathers, but added daily to them, which was not ac∣cording to the law.

And this way we find followed among Christians also, b 1.344 one thus paraphrasing the words:

Israel had Altars enough, which might suffice them for sin∣ning in worshipping of Idols, why was it then needful to them to adde more to increase their sin?

As for their multiplying of Altars, besides what was by Jeroboam and c 1.345 Ahab done, we read in this Prophecy, c. 10.1. According to the multitude of his fruit he hath increased Altars, and 12.11. Their Altars are as heaps in the furrows of the fields: which were all to them to sin, ut quanto plura fuerint, tanto illius scelera multiplicentur, as Jerom speaks, so that the more they were, by so much the more were their sins multiplied. In all these ways, what he saith, to sin, is taken in both clauses of the verse in the proper notion of sin, and the guilt thereof; but it is by d 1.346 others taken in the latter in the notion of punishment for sin. So the Chaldee takes it, paraphrasing, Because they of the house of Ephraim have multiplied Altars to sin, the Al∣tars of their Idols have been to them (or, shall be to them) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lethaklo, e 1.347 for offence, or ruin; shall bring upon them destruction, and cause them to be given up into captivity; and in this way the word f 1.348 Altar is by some in the second clause understood; not of the same Altars as in the first, not of their own in their own countrey, but of their enemies Altars in a strange land, the land of their captivity. To which purpose Grotius thus gives the meaning;

Because they made to themselves many Al∣tars, by which they might (or, did) sin a∣gainst God, therefore Altars, to wit, the Altars of the Assyrians, ipsis in poenam erunt, shall be for punishment to them, when they shall be compelled to bring to them wood, wa∣ter, and sacrifices;

or, as * 1.349 another,

being led into captivity they shall be compelled to sacrifice on their Altars, and so forced to pollute themselves with the sin of Idolatry.

Because they multiplied Altars at home, Al∣tars shall be multiplied abroad unto them; those were their sin, these shall be their punish∣ment. This is much according to what was threatned Deut. 4.28. and Jer. 16.13.

The Greek of the LXX give a different reading from what we have seen, rendring, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Because Ephraim hath multiplied Altars, beloved Altars have been to him for sins: and so the printed Arabic fol∣lowing it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, only with this difference, that in the Arabic is added the Pronoun, his, which is not in the Greek, his

beloved Altars have been to him to, or for, sin, and that the word for sin is placed last in the words, so that it may not be thought to belong to the first clause; whereas in the Greek it might. and so it be rendred, Because Ephraim hath multiplied Altars to (or, for) sins, Altars have been beloved by him: as g 1.350 they seem to think, who look on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as not added only of their own, but put in the place of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lechato, ad peccandum, to sin. But according to the Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lechato, in the first place, will be omitted, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or beloved, ad∣ded in the last. Why the Greek should so read, I do not find any reason conjectured at; perhaps they might think their multiply∣ing Altars, to shew they much loved them, and so might think good to adde that, but why 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lechato, to sin, being twice repeated in the Hebrew, they should put it but once, I know not. In some copies instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is observed to be read h 1.351 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which would signifie sinful. i 1.352 Some conje∣cture it might be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to sin, and then there would be no difference, and the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 belong to the first clause.

The scope and summe of all these different expositions may be well put together in one Paraphrastical explication, thus: Seeing they forsaking God and that one Altar, at which alone he required them to serve him, idola∣trously multiplied Altars to themselves, Altars against his command, which to do was ma∣nifestly a sin in them, therefore should those their beloved Altars be accordingly occasions of great sin, sin upon sin, and for such im∣puted to them to their condemnation; he would give them up to run on in their evil courses till their iniquity were full, and they ripe for destruction, and then deliver them into the hands of their enemies, who should compell them to do that service at, and to, their idolatrous Altars, which should appear a manifest punishment to them for those of their own, and the willing service that in their own countrey they made them for, and performed to their beloved Idols at them. So shall they be punished by what they offen∣ded in. It might seem strange that Israel, who was so well instructed in the law of God, and the only service which he required, should frame to themselves such ways, clean contrary thereto: but the reason is declared in the next words.

v. 11. I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were coun∣ted as a strange thing.

The words thus translated agree very well to the Original, and give a plain meaning, so as to shew what was the reason why the Isra∣elites so transgressed in multiplying Altars, and leaves them without excuse in so doing. God had written to them the great things of his law, things deservedly so called, and such as would by all that heard them be confessed so to be: all that heard of them could not but say of Israel, instructed in them, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people, Deut. 4.6. for what nation is there so great (saith he) that hath statutes and judgments so righte∣ous as all this law which I set before you this day? v. 8. Great may well be called those things which made them so great and so wise in the sight of all nations; but then that they might make them so, was to be attended to that which follows there, v. 9. Only take heed to thy self, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou for∣get the things which thinc eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life, but teach them thy sons and thy son's sons. For they were written not only for the present occasion, and then to be laid aside as useless, but to be for continual use and direction to them through all generations, that so by ob∣serving them they might continue in Gods favour, and keep up their own greatness, and be still a wise and understanding people. Here then that which is taxed in them, as that by which they became so foolish, as forsaking God and the right way of his service to follow Idols, and to multiply to themselves Altars, is because they heeded not to those great things which God had written in his law, and deli∣vered to them for a perpetual rule of his wor∣ship, but so far neglected them, as that they were counted to them as a strange thing, a thing that concerned them not, and they did not therefore regard. Their extravagancy in their worship was not for want of a rule to direct them better, but because they had not regard to that rule which God had given them, but became willingly and obstinately ignorant of it.

This translation of ours, and the meaning which it suggests, might we well acquiesce in, as perspicuous and obvious; yet because there are others who give something different inter∣pretations, it will be convenient a little singly to take a view of some of the words in the Original, that we may see the grounds of such differences, and how they may be ad∣justed. The first words are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ectob lo rubbe torati, which ours ren∣der, I have written to him the great things of my law, where the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ectob, rendred, I have written, is indeed of the Fu∣ture tense, and would literally sound, I will write, But, as we have elsewhere seen, k 1.353 that tense is indifferently used for any other, as to denote either what is past, or present, as well

as what is future, as the place and matter spoken of require: and therefore in regard that the Law was long since written by Mo∣ses, do ours render it in the preterperfect tense, as of what had been done, there∣in agreeing with many others. So the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Syriack, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Pagnin, scripsi, the MS. Arab, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I did write, in the signification of the Preterimper∣fect; and others, I had written, in the l 1.354 Pre∣terpluperfect tense; all of them as of the time past. And so Kimchi notes, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ectob here may be the same in sense as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ca∣tabti, I have written. I have reproved them, and my statutes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 have been, or were, written to him, saith Aben Ezra. But the same tense also is not unusually put to signifie a m 1.355 continued act and a custom of doing a thing, and therefore is by others rendred in the n 1.356 Pre∣sent tense, scribo, I do write. He wrote them to them by Moses, not for that time only, but that they might be perpetually before their eyes, as if he were still writing. He continued al∣so to write them o 1.357 by the Prophets, who daily put them in mind of them, and interpreted them to them, and p 1.358 themselves wrote also to them their own admonitions agreeable to them; al∣though their preaching them to them may also be called writing them, in a larger acception of the word, in such a kind of speech as St. Paul useth, calling his preaching of Christ cru∣cified to the Galatians a setting forth of him before their eyes crucified among them. Gal. 3.1.

Others according to its form render it in the Future. So the Vulgar Latin, scribam ei multiplices leges meas, which the Doway transla∣tion renders, I will write to him my manifold laws. But the Verb following in the next clause, to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nechesabu, have been accounted, and so therein rendred, quae reputa∣ta sunt, (by adding, quae) which have been ac∣counted, doth seem to require that it should be spoken rather of something that he had al∣ready written, than of what he would after write. And therefore q 1.359 those who follow that translation, in their expositions for the giving the meaning of it, would have it read as by way of interrogation, or Ironically, with a kind of indignation, Shall or should I write to them my manifold laws, seeing those that I have written have been so accounted as they are by them? To what purpose will it be that I should any more write such things to them? they will still be contemned by them.

Abarbinel gives much the same meaning, by understanding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, if, and putting it before the Verb, explaining it,

If the great things of the law and its commandments shall be written to him, they will be as new things to him, because they have been accounted as a stranger that never heard of them:

and he notes, that others taking it in the Pretertense make the sense to be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 al∣though I have written. Ruffinus to avoid that difficulty, from the Verb being in the Future, solves it by giving another meaning to writ∣ing, than it is ordinarily taken in, understand∣ing by it, I will execute on them those punish∣ments in the law written. This is by r 1.360 some liked, by s 1.361 others looked upon as harsh. The Greek also and the printed Arabick re∣tain the Future, but of that we shall take notice after we have first explained the next word, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rubbe, as by ours read, and in construction with the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Torati, following it, translated, The great things of my law.

It is a known thing that the root or Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabab, whence the Noun is, hath in it the signification both of magnitude, and multi∣tude, to be great, and to be many; so that this Noun may accordingly signifie either great things, or many things, and it is accordingly by some taken in the one sense, by others in the other. Ours we see take it in the first, and so do many others; for to this they seem all to have respect, who render it, t 1.362 eximia, v 1.363 magnalia, w 1.364 pretiosa, x 1.365 honorabilia, y 1.366 praecipua, z 1.367 amplitudines, a 1.368 documenta amplissima, * 1.369 Axioma∣ta, or by any like word denoting greatness or excellency. So Kimchi notes it here to im∣port, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Great and honourable things out of my law. So also R. Tanchum ex∣pounds it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Its great things, i. e. its great mysteries and high truths. And in this way well answers to it what is spoken in respect to the things of the Gospel, as this in respect to the things of the Law, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Acts 12.11. The great or wonderful things of God. b 1.370 Some think here to be had respect to a di∣stinction of the things of the Law, among which there were some of more excellency and higher concernment than others; and so by our Saviour called the weightier matters of the law, Mat. 13.33. as judgment, mercy, and faith, and the love of God, Luk. 11. &c. which, it seems, they, pretending to follow it in matters of lower account, (though by reason of Gods command to have been duely respected) as * 1.371 of∣fering many sacrifices, or the like * 1.372 neg∣lected. But perhaps, as b 1.373 one thinks, it may

be better here to understand the whole Law, comprehended under this title as great, and glorious, and marveilous.

Others, many and of great authority, take it in the signification of multitude, or multipli∣city. So the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mul∣tiplicity, or manifoldness of my law. The Syriac also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the multitude of my laws, or my many laws. The LXX also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the printed Arabic following them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a multitude, yea the MS. A∣rabic also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the multitude (or the greater part) of my law. The Vulgar Latin, multiplices leges meas, my manifold laws. As the wisdom of God, by whom the Law was given, is by the Apostle called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a manifold wisdom, Eph. 3.10. so c 1.374 may his Law also as well be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a manifold law, containing a multitudc of pre∣cepts fitted to all occasions of men, and dire∣cting them in all parts of their duty, and to a right performance of them, for the right or∣dering of all their actions, that they might be well pleasing to him. Which so either of these significations be taken it will be to the same purpose for the commendation of the law of God, and aggravating their sin for that disrepect of it, for which in the following words they are taxed.

But besides what hath been observed of this little diversity of the rendring this word by Interpreters, there may be observed some∣thing concerning the reading of it in the He∣brew: for it is among those words concern∣ing which there is, as they speak, a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Keri, i.e. what is read, and a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cetib, i. e. what is written. That which is read, and generally followed, as by all those whom we have men∣tioned it is, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rubbe, signifying, as we have seen them render, great things, or ma∣nifold things, or the like; and that which is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which would be, Rubbo, and signifie the greatness of it, or him, or multitude of it, or Rabbu, they have been great, or multi∣plied: but because the vowels put to it in the text do not suffer it so to be read, but would require it, if those letters stood, to be read, Rubbeu, which is not a word of any known form; therefore thinking the last letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 u to be written instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i, they so put it in the margin, not adventuring to change any thing in the sacred body of the Text, and warn by the mark of the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(standing for Keri) added to it, that it ought so to be read as if it were with an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or i, Rubbe, and so is it ge∣nerally (as we have seen) read and expoun∣ded.

Yet doth Kimchi, besides his exposition of the reading as we have seen, offer an exposi∣tion also that would agree to the word as it is written, (supposing then a fitting of the vow∣els to those consonants) and saith the meaning then would be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the commandments of which there are many (or which are multiplied) in my law. The learned Ludovicus de Dieu gives also an interpretation according to what is written, saying, that ac∣cording to what is read, he should render it, scribo eis magnalia regis mei? Do I write to them the great things of my law? with an interro∣gation, as above we have seen some to do, which will be as much as, If (or when) I do write, &c. But according to what is written, Cum scribo ei praestantiam suam, when I do write to him Rubbo, his excellency, to wit, my law which is his excellency, they, to wit, both his own excellency and my law, are accounted, &c. so calling his law the excellency or dig∣nity of that people to whom it was written.

Here, by the way, seems to be to me a proof, that there were in their ancient He∣brew copies the vowels put, which they durst not to alter; else would he that put them, have fitted them to the letter written in the text, and not by reason of them have conjectu∣red that the letter was written wrong, or that it was not so plain but that it might easily be mistaken, and therefore not daring to change any thing to the least title or piece of a line, have given warning in the margin what letter it was to be taken for: for between the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 u and the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i there is no farther diffe∣rence, than that the tail-line of one is shor∣ter than of the other; and if the one be a little longer than it usually is, it might be mistaken for the other, and d 1.375 on the contrary, though it were not so meant. And this word being so read, according to the direction of the vow∣ell, is properly joyned in construction with the following word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Torati, of my law, and with it makes up one clause. And so are the words joyned in our translation, and in most others. Only the Greek of the LXX, and the Arabic that is printed, following them, make a pause after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rubbe, and refer 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Torati to the latter part of the sentence, thus distinguishing and translating the whole; the Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 e 1.376 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will delineate or write to him a multitude, and his legi∣timate things have been accounted for strange things; and the Arabic, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which Arabic words sound, I will (or do) specify, or distinct∣ly set down, to him, (or, give to him in several kinds) a multitude, and my laws have been ac∣counted strange. The Latin translator there renders the first words, Exagitabo multitudinem ejus. I know not to what sense here; for though otherwise the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may have the no∣tion of agitation, I see not how it will fit here: the other from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a species, or kind, viz. to specifie, or distinguish, to give or describe in several kinds, seems much more conveni∣ent.

Here, by the way, may be observed also, that the reading, which the Arabic followed, differs from the reading of the ordinary Greek copies, in which is read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, his legal (or lawful) things, it having it with the Pronoun of the first person, my laws: why they should so distinguish the clauses of the sentence, I know not. That which ours (I think with all others but them) follow, seems more convenient, and to make much a more perspicuous sense, viz. in making one clause to consist of these words, (as we said,) I have written to him the great things of my law, which shews what great and good things God did for them; and then another of the following, wherein their ill reception thereof is taxed, viz. they were ac∣counted as a strange thing to them: for connect∣ing which with the other, ours, with f 1.377 some others, supply, but; others put them as it were both in one by adding g 1.378 Quae, which have been accounted &c. But concerning any such connexion by any made between them, and the conveniency thereof, or whether any such be requisite, it will be easie to judg when we shall have the meaning of the words them∣selves, which seems perspicuous enough ac∣cording to our translation, and others that go the like way; namely, that those great things of Gods law which he wrote to them, and therefore ought to have been continually be∣fore their eyes, in their mind, and in their mouth, for direction of them in all their ways, (according to what he also comman∣ded Deut. 6.7, 8, 9.) they did yet, notwith∣standing the greatness of the things, and the concernment which they were of to them, so far neglect and disregard them, that they were to them as a strange thing, a thing that they had not heard of, much less observed or duely regarded.

In the history of the book of Kings, h 1.379 c. 22. and c. 23. we find, i 1.380 that in Josiah's time the book of the Law which was found in the house of the Lord, was to the Jews as a thing they had not seen; yet when it was read to them, they willingly stood to the covenant therein contained. But the phrase here, that the things which God had written were to Ephraim or the ten Tribes a strange thing, seems to import not a simple, but a willingly con∣tracted ignorance, through disrespect and contempt of them, as things not concerning them, and therefore not regarded, but reje∣cted by them, that they might without con∣trole run on in their wicked idolatrous ways and devices, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they cast them away as a stranger, (or, strange thing,) to which no respect or regard is had, as R. Tanchum expounds it. And this is a plain exposition of the words according to ours and most translations, in which the E∣pithet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zar, strange, is referred to the things spoken of.

But there is another way taken by some, who refer it, not to the things, but to the per∣sons to whom they were written, as if they were strange, or strangers. This the Chaldee takes, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And they have been accounted as the [heathen] nations, as if he should say, That though God had written the great things of his law to them, and therein made known himself and his will to them, and brought them into co∣venant with himself, that they should be a peculiar people to him; yet they so behaved themselves, as if they were as strange to him as k 1.381 any of the heathens, l 1.382 who had no know∣ledge of his laws, and were no better acquain∣ted with him or his law than any of them.

Abarbinel in like manner takes it in his ex∣position of the words, besides what we have already seen out of him to that purpose. The complaint (faith he) of the Prophet is, that they being Israelites, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were accounted or esteem∣ed as strangers, which never had heard the word of the law, so that when the chief of the words of the Law and the precepts thereof should be written to them, they would be as if they had not ever heard of them.

Among Christian Expositors also, Capito refers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zar, strange, or, a stranger, to the persons, expounding it, That they were by their neighbouring nations deservedly contem∣ned as strangers, ut qui legem contemnant, que observatores suos ornaret, atque admirabiles red∣deret, in as much as they contemned that law which would have made them to have been honoured and admired. But the former way, which refers it to the things, seems the plainer, and amongst such translations as we meet with, ours the most congruous, and the meaning as it hath

already been given, viz. that through their aversion from the great things of God's Law, which he had by Moses first written, and by his Prophets continually inculcated to them, and their willing neglect thereof, it was come to that pass, that those great things of the greatest concern that might be to them were as a strange thing to them, a thing that they neg∣lected, yea even contemned and rejected, as if it did not at all concern them; and this be∣ing so, it must needs be that what they per∣formed, though perhaps pretended to be ac∣cording to the law, and learned out of it, should be looked upon by God as strange worship: as in the Law we read of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ketoreth zarah, strange incense, &c. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esh zarah, strange fire, which God com∣manded not, m 1.383 Lev. 10.1. which he would not ac∣knowledge or accept of. This seems to be ta∣ken by Jun. and Trem. as the import of the words, while rendring them, Quae praescribo ei documentis amplissimis legis meae, tanquam res extra reputantur, Those things which I pre∣scribe to them in the most ample documents of my Law, are accounted as a strange thing, they adde this note, Ego ritus & ceremonias externas isto rum omnes nihili facio, I make no account of all their rites and outward ceremonies, as he speaks of such like n 1.384 Is. 1.11. &c. and c. 66.3. This though we look not on it as the primary scope of the words, yet is that which by ne∣cessary consequence follows, on their account∣ing the great things of Gods law as a strange thing, viz. his looking on what they perfor∣med as strange things, and rejecting them. That so the case was, the next verse plainly shews.

v. 13. They sacrifice flesh for the sacri∣fices of mine offerings, and eat it; but the Lord accepteth them not: now will he remember their iniquity, and visit their sins: they shall return to Egypt.

The Margin hath, Or, in the sacrifices of mine offerings they &c. to wit, sacrifice flesh, and eat it; and that is more agreeable to the placing of the words in the Hebrew, in which the first words are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zibche hab∣habai, which they render, the sacrifices of mine offerings, and supply in the text, for; in the Margin, in. For in the Hebrew it is without either, The sacrifices &c. which o 1.385 some think likewise to require something to be supplied, which they make to be, Quod attinet ad, ren∣dring, Quod attinet ad sacrificia donorum meo∣rum, as for what concerns the sacrifices of my offer∣ings, or, as for the sacrifices &c. But the main difficulty in the words seems to me to be from the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhabai, rendred, my offerings, viz. what is the import and genuine signification of it, it being of an unusual form, and no where else occurring in Scripture, so that concerning the derivation and import thereof there is among the Jewish Doctors some difference. Kimchi in his notes on the place, saith it is from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yahab, which signifies, to give, by doubling the two last letters, and so to import the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mattanothai, my gifts, or offerings; in which we see ours agree with him, and so do most Christian Expositors: yet he addes, that others do give to it the notion of rosting of flesh, according as it is used in the writings of their ancient Rabbins for burning, or scorching; and therefore in his Dictionary puts as a root by it self, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhab, which he saith signifies, to burn, or scorch, and confirms it, not onely by the use of it in the writings of the Rabbins, but in the Arabic tongue also, in which he saith, one that rosteth is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhabi, and this way do more of the Jews take.

So Solomo Jarchi, who expounds the words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The sacrifices of my whole burnt-of∣ferings, which they burn-before me with the fire which is on mine Altar: (his words I give out of a Manuscript copy, because in the printed ones they are not so plain, there being instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Baesh, in, or with the fire, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Caesh, which caused an error in Mercer's La∣tin translation, who renders it, sicut ignis, as fire.) R. Tanchum also, who saith, that the signification of the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such offerings, the fat of which they burne to (or, in) my name. For, saith he, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhabah, signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rosting, scorching, burning, according to what in the Rabbins is said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they scorch it with fire &c. From the same sig∣nification or the like is also what he saith, that some others will have the word to signifie (and himself puts it in his Dictionary called Morshed,) viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rosters, as he saith also that the Arabs call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Cook or Roster 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhabi, as likewise we find by AbuWalid before him affirmed He might have added, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Butcher,

as the Author of p 1.386 Alkamus saith it signifies, and AbuWalid appears to have been aware of, and accordingly makes the meaning to be,

That they rejecting the great things which God had written to them in his law, turn-themselves to look after Butchers and Cooks for the eating of flesh.

I should think it would be more apposite to say, that their sa∣crifices were no better than meat killed by Butchers and Cooks for ordinary eating, and had nothing of a true legal sacrifice in them, and were not directed to Gods service, but for serving their own bellies.

Another signification both of these Jews look on the word to have, agreeing to ano∣ther signification of it in the Arabic tongue, which is of swiftness, and hast, so that it should signifie continued, frequent, and often sacri∣fices, such as hastily follow one another.

The Chaldee seems to have looked on some other derivation or signification of the word, while he renders, They sacrifice 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Dimgabban min ones, such things as they ga∣ther by rapin (or exact by violence,) they kill flesh and eat it. I should guess, if it be not too bold a conjecture, that in giving this sig∣nification to the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhabai, he had respect to what is said above, c. 4.18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahabu hebu, rendred, they love Give ye, as if Habhabai were such things as they got by exaction, and saying, q 1.387 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hab hab, Give, give. The Syriac seems to follow the Chaldee in giving the signification of the words, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Latin Translator renders, victi∣mas selectas sacrificant, & carnem edunt, They kill (or sacrifice) select sacrifices, and eat flesh. But its manifest it ought rather to be transla∣ted, They sacrifice sacrifices with exactions, (or, of things exacted,) that so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ge∣byotho may agree with the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Me∣gaban, they exact, in that signification of the root, as it is used for gatherings, 1 Cor. 16.2. and from the same root is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gaboyo, an ex∣actor, or collector, though otherwise it may signifie, select, chosen things, the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gebo signifying both, to choose, and to exact. But if it be rendred, as he would have it here, select, chosen, as an Epithet to sacrifices, there is no regard had to the letter or Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Be, signifying, with, or of, which there is no reason to omit; he must have at least have rendred it, sacrifices with select things, which I suppose is not so proper as the other agreeing with the Chaldee.

The LXX or Greek seems to have looked on the word as derived from another theme, viz. from r 1.388 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahab, to love, s 1.389 they ren∣dring, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the printed Arabic following reads, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their beloved Altars, because if they sacrifice a sacrifice, and (or, they also) eat the fiesh, the Lord will not accept them. Where * 1.390 some conjecture the first words should be read, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, their beloved sacrifices &c. But I will not examine the translation farther than to shew, that they seem to have taken the word we speak of to be derived from, or to have in it the notion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahab, to love.

This being observed concerning the signifi∣cation of the word, suggests to us another observation concerning the form of it; that according to some of the significations of it the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i, in the termination ai at the end of it, may be looked on as a Pronoun of the first Person affixed, to signifie, my, or mine, as in ours it is put. And so we have seen it to be looked on by Kimchi, and by R. Tanchum, and so by several others; according to others of them it cannot be looked on as so. We may note therefore, that by some it is affir∣med, that that letter makes up only the form of the Noun, without any signification in it self. So one Japhet, cited and approved by R. Aben Ezra, saith, that that letter, the word being from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Habhab, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, addititious. The like is also noted by the Author of the MS. Arab. translation, viz. that it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a letter added to the ra∣dicals, and therefore he translateth it only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the sacrifices of gifts, (or offerings,) though others he saith would have it rendred, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (as if it were an Affixe) my gifts, or offerings, to wit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which were by the prescript of God, The form is not frequent of Nouns end∣ing in that termination; yet such as there are

examples of, and by both of them is for ex∣ample brought, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sadai; which Drusius not liking, puts in place thereof 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gobai, Locusts, in which the last letter is not for an Affixe, but only a termination of the plural number.

By what hath been said at large of this word, appears the chief ground of any such diversity of expositions of this clause which we meet with, there being no question made of the other words as to the signification of them. The greatest difference we find is in a different rendring of the Verbs as to the Tense, which being of the Future form, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yizbechu, properly, they shall, or will, sacrifice, or slay, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yocelu, shall, or will, eat, may yet according to what hath been else∣where observed concerning the promiscuous use of that form, be indifferently rendred in, or used for, any other tense, as the sense shall seem to require; and therefore are here by Interpreters differently rendred, by t 1.391 some, sacrificaverunt, and comederunt, They have sa∣crificed, and, they have eaten. v 1.392 Others, They shall offer, they shall eat; w 1.393 others, let them kill, (or, sacrifice,) and, let them eat, the flesh of those sacrifices which they offer unto me. x 1.394 Others, as ours, (which I think the plainest,) they sa∣crifice, and eat. Whatever difference be in this kind, (or also in what concerns the signi∣fication of the word before spoken of) the scope is still acknowledged to be the same, viz. to tax the Israelites for what they were before taxed for, viz. for multiplying Altars to sin, for not attending to those things which God had written to them in his law, or, that though they pretending to worship him, of∣fered many sacrifices, yet they with such wrong intentions, and in so undue and unlegal manner, offered them, that they appeared to be, not as religious offerings to him, but as ordinary flesh killed by butchers and cooks, y 1.395 with which they might, as it is intima••ed they chiefly intended to do, glut and feast themselves, but not appease or please him, as therefore he addes to shew them so to have really been in his sight, but (which Particle is by the translators supplied, not being in the Original) the Lord accepteth them not.

Here by the way may be made a question of whom he speaks this; whether of the ten tribes, (who seem before peculiarly spoken of,) or of Judah also. Abarbinel, taking the last letter to be an Affixe of the first person, signifying, mine, as we have seen ours and others to take it, thinks it to be a proof that Judah also is spoken to, as intimating such sacrifices as were offered on Gods Altar, and therefore by him called, mine offerings, where∣as those of Israel were not so, but on their Idols Altars; as if he said, Why do they of∣fer them there? they kill that flesh (or, z 1.396 they kill them for flesh) for themselves, and let them eat it, because God accepteth them not. But I know not whether this proof have any vali∣dity in it: for besides that, as we have seen, many do deny it to be an Affixe here, so that it should appropriate the offering spoken of to God, if it be so taken, yet may they be so called, not because God owned them for his, but because they pretended them to be such as he in his law commanded, and that they offered them to him, halting, as it is said of them, between God and their Idols; so that they may be so called by him in re∣gard to their pretended, though not sincere, intentions. So that we have nothing to move us to think it not to be meant of Israel's of∣ferings, without Judah. Whose ever they were, being so performed as it appears they were, with a wicked mind, and in undue manner, he saith that he will not accept them, a 1.397 neither their offerings, nor them for them. They have their reward, and perhaps that which they chiefly intended. They eat flesh, but God is so far from being pleased with what they do, that he is greatly provoked, as appears by what he subjoyns, Now will he remember their iniquity, and visit their sins.

Now will he remember &c. This expres∣sion, if spoken of a man, would imply the calling to mind something which he had for∣gotten. But of God, to whom all things are always present, and who is not subject to any defect, alteration, or change, it cannot be so understood. His forgetting is only his forbearing to manifest by some visible act his knowing or taking notice of something, and the open execution of his purpose concerning it; which sometimes makes foolish men con∣ceive, that he had either taken no notice of it, or had let it slip out of his mind again, and such execution of his purpose towards any is in Scripture-phrase, accommodated to the language and use of men, called his remem∣bring, and his visiting. The words are both of them in this kind, often in Scripture used, both for good and for bad; when for good, they denote his open conferring on any, or do∣ing for any, such good as for a while he suf∣fered them to want or be without; when for evil, his bringing on them such evil of affli∣ction or punishment, which though by them long (perhaps) before deserved, he hitherto deferred, as if he took not notice of their deeds. And in this way it is here taken.

Though the Israelites had forsaken God for Idols, and also neglected his Law, that it was a strange thing to them, he had hitherto in his long-suffering forborn them; so that as they forgot him, they might think he had forgotten them, and took no notice of them and their evil doings; yet will he not still so do, he will now, i. e. shortly remember, i. e. call them to account for their iniquity, and * 1.398 visit, i, e. punish them for their sins: which punishment seems in the next words partly declared to consist in this, that they shall re∣turn into Egypt, viz. forced by their distress thither to betake themselves to seek for help and refuge. It was laid on them as a com∣mand from God, that they should no more return into Egypt, Deut. 17.16. but again threatned as a punishment on their disobedi∣ence, that the Lord would bring them into E∣gypt again with ships, by the way whereof he spake unto them, Thou shalt see it no more again; and that there they should be sold unto their ene∣mies for bondmen, and bondwomen, and no man should buy them, Deut. 28.68. It is also in this Prophet c. 9.3. threatned as a punishment, that they should go into Egypt; They shall not dwell in the Lords land, but Ephraim shall return into Egypt, &c. and again v. 6. Lo, they are gone because of destruction, Egypt shall gather them up, Memphis shall bury them. That they did go thither some of them, it is manifest from c. 7.11. and c. 12.11. where it is objected to them as a fault and folly, They call to Egypt; and in the history of them 2 Kin. 17.4. we find that Hoshea King of Israel sent messengers to So King of Egypt, to back him in his conspiracy against the King of Assyria: this was before their de∣struction, and more than probable it is that when their land was taken, and their King∣dom destroyed by the Assyrian, many of them fled for refuge into Egypt, and dwelt there. Which may be confirmed from what is said below, speaking of their future de∣liverance, v. 11.11. They shall tremble as a bird out of Egypt, and as a dove out of the land of Assyria; so that there also were of them as well as in Assyria, though not carried cap∣tives in an hostile manner, but going of their own accord.

Some having respect to the command pro∣hibiting their going into Egypt, look upon their going thither as they did, diffiding in God, and relying on them to seek help against the Assyrians, with whom they had broken co∣venant, x 1.399 to be the sin which God would now remember, and visit, or punish them for, or at least a cause of his remembring and visiting their sins. If it be so looked on, it may be read, they do return. But if we look on the words with respect to the curse denounced against them on their disobedience, that they should be forced back to Egypt, and consider what a misery it was through fear of immi∣nent destruction to be forced so to do, to so little purpose as they did, as having no other hopes of refuge, and this bootless; then may we well, with y 1.400 others, look on them as a specifying of that punishment with which he would visit them, and make good that curse upon them. And this seems the plainest ex∣position of them: although there be others who would save us the labour of enquiring how or when the Israelites returned into E∣gypt, and whither their going thither be spo∣ken of as their sin, or as the punishment of their sin, or as a new made the punishment of other sins; while they look on these words as not importing their having gone, or future going into Egypt at all, z 1.401 but their going for a punishment of their sins captives into Assyria, which should be to them as bad a condition as their fathers were formerly in in the Egyp∣tian bondage. a 1.402 Others look upon it as spo∣ken by way of derision, that when God should send out his judgments on them, they should go into Egypt, as hoping by that means to be secured against them, and to stand out against him. The plainest way seems to be, to look on it as a denun••iation of punishment, and a description of the distress they should be brought to.

Kimchi thinks the words to have respect to the going of Johanam the son of Careah, and those that went with him, into Egypt, against the word of God: Jer. 44. b 1.403 but this would be a confounding of that which was done by the Jews, with what is here more peculiarly spo∣ken of the Israelites of the ten tribes.

Here in some copies of the Greek and the printed Arabic is read, they have returned into Egypt, and then added, and they shall eat un∣clean things in Assyria. Those words do in∣deed occur in the the 3^d v. of the next chap∣ter, both in the Hebrew, and the Greek; but how they come here to be added in the Greek, being not in the Hebrew, I know not, except we shall think it was by the error or inanimad vertency of some Scribe anciently: which is confirmed, by that it is in other co∣pies c 1.404 not found; and St. Jerom saith, it ought to be noted as superfluous.

v. 14. For Israel hath forgotten his ma∣ker, and buildeth temples; and Ju∣dah

hath multiplied fenced cities: but I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour the palaces thereof.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vayishcach Israel, for Is∣rael. That which is rendred, for, is the Con∣junction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, which properly signifies, and, and is so by others rendred; yet no doubt may it be rendred well enough, d 1.405 for, if the sense require it, and being so rendred seems to give such connexion between the preceding words and the following, as if what here fol∣lows were a farther reason why God would now remember their iniquity, and visit their sins, and cause them to return into Egypt; viz. because they had forgotten their maker, &c.

e 1.406 Some render it, Denique, lastly, as an in∣ference of a conclusion of what he had said. Which way soever it be rendred, this verse farther declares both the fault of Israel and their punishment consequent thereon, taking in together Judah, which had not been be∣fore named, though, according to Abarbinel, comprehended. The fault or sin is, first, that Israel had forgotten his maker; which he may be well said to have done, in respect either to what hath been before said of them, as that of their silver and gold they made them Idols, and contrary to Gods institution they multi∣plied Altars, and in that they (v. 12.) so far neglected Gods law, that it was accounted as a strange thing to them; or else (which seem∣eth nearer) in regard to what here follows, that they built temples, and multiplied fenced ci∣ties. They that did these things contrary to Gods ordinance, whatever relation they would pretend to him, having him perhaps much in their mouths, and crying, My God we know thee, (as v. 2.) may deservedly be said to have forgotten him; it being not ne∣cessary that by forgetting God should be meant a total loosing of all knowledge of him, but f 1.407 sufficient to make them to be said so to do, when they want that affection which ought to follow the memory of a true knowledge of him, as by what they are accused of before, and after, it appears they did. The Chaldee therefore well paraphraseth it, hath left the service, or worship of &c. The MS. Arabick, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hath cast off his maker.

Their sin in forgetting God is aggravated by the title given him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Osehu, his ma∣ker. This title here seems so used as to put them in mind not onely of that benefit com∣mon to them all, viz. that God made them men, but of that peculiar prerogative, in that he made them Israel, viz. his peculiar people, whom he had especial regard to, and by taking them into a nearer relation to him∣self than any other nation, ennobled them and exalted them above others, as owning himself for their God, and them for his peo∣ple; yea his children, his first-born, whom he would have especial care of, and defend and protect by his mighty power from all evils, and bless with extraordinary blessings of all sorts; whom having redeemed out of Egypt, he framed into a great people, and seated in the land of promise. So Kimchi explains the word in that sense, in which he saith it is used Deut. 32.6. Is it not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hu a'sheca, he that hath made thee? i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hath made thee great, or magnified thee? In which it is used also where he saith, God * 1.408 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 who made Moses and Aaron, i. e. advanced. So that it is well looked on by g 1.409 Expositors as com∣prehending all the great prerogatives that God gave to the seed of Abraham, whereby he distinguished them from other people, by the enjoyment of which they certainly were obliged to acknowledge him their ma∣ker in a more eminent manner; and the me∣mory of these his benefits ought to have kept them in a greater love and fear of him, and stricter obedience to him, and sole and per∣petual dependance on him; and great stupi∣dity must it be in them to forget these things, for a perpetual putting them in mind of which, he used such care by calling on them in the law, and by the mouths of the Pro∣phets, besides many other ways which he constituted to keep them in perpetual memo∣ry thereof; yet do they forget him, and leaving their duty to him, and dependance on him, not only forfeiting it by their disobedi∣ence, but obstinately casting it off, and de∣spising it, do what follows, Israel buildeth temples, and Judah hath multiplied cities.

The word rendred; temples, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He∣caloth, the plural from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hecal, which is used elsewhere in Scripture both for a temple, and for a palace. It signifies, I suppose, any great, lofty, or magnificent building, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Haicalo in the Arabic is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an high or lofty building, as also any great things, from the theme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies, to be great and high. If it be rendred, temples, then may it be understood (as by the Chaldee it is) of such as they built to their Idols, to worship them therein, (al∣though to have built any even to God him∣self, besides that one at Jerusalem, had been utterly unlawful to them. If it should be

rendred Palaces, or the like, then of such strong buildings or forts (as * 1.410 others) built for defence for themselves. And for such Aben Ezra thinks it here understood, and Kimchi also saith it may be convenient here to take it as it stands in conjunction with what Judah is taxed for, of building fenced cities. In either way taken it argues Israel to have forgotten their Maker, and not to have right thoughts of him, in that having rebelled against him, and hearing his threats against them for it, they turned not again by repen∣tance to make peace with him that they might find still protection from him, but, to defend themselves against him their Maker, trusted either to Idols whom they thought to please by building temples to them, or to strong holds; both of their own making.

Judah seems here also taxed as guilty in the same kind with Israel, in that it is said, and Judah hath multiplied fenced cities, which is not so to be understood as if it were unlawful to build fenced cities or fortify themselves a∣gainst their enemies by such advantageous means (as appears by what Nehemiah did, by Gods direction, and approbation) but that they do it not with forgetting God or casting off obedience to him, neglecting to put their trust in him, as if without he kept the city or countrey, it could by any the strongest for∣tifications be secured, or as if they without him could, or he without them could not, de∣fend them. As guilty in this kind they are taxed Isaiah 22.8. where reckoning up what care they took for fortifying their city, he adds, but ye have not looked unto the Maker thereof, neither had respect unto him that fashion∣ed it long ago, v. 11. as elsewhere upbraiding them with their fenced cities, he shews to what end they built them, adding as an Epi∣thet, wherein they trusted, Jer. 5.17.

Thus then their sin being described, the ill consequent or punishment thereof follows, But I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devoure the Palaces thereof, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veshalachti, But I will send, others, And I; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve is and, but not improperly as the sense requires sometimes, as here by ours, translated, But; and so shews the vanity of their trust in the strength of those cities; They multiply them, but to what profit as long as they do it against God, as if by this means they could stand out against him? By excluding him they do but shut themselves up to that destruction which thereby provoked he will send on them, which is expressed by saying, he will send a fire upon them to devour their cities and the pa∣laces thereof; which may either be properly understood of fire by which they should be consumed, or of some h 1.411 other destruction which should be as great and terrible as if their cities and palaces were consumed by fire. But we may well literally understand it, read∣ing in the history the i 1.412 2 Kin. 25.8. concern∣ing their chiefe city Jerusalem, that therein Nebuzaradan captain of that guard to Nebu∣chadnezzar, burnt the house of the Lord, and the Kings house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great mans house burnt he with fire; and we may well think that the other cities were so dealt with; reading in Isaiah, your countrey is desolate, your cities are burnt with fire, Isaiah 1.7. some refer it to what was done before by Senacherib, who came up a∣gainst the fenced cities of Judah and took them, 2 Kings 18.13.

This Judgment was executed on them by the enemy, by him the fire was kindled and blown, yet doth God say that it is by his sending. If they had subsisted in their fenced cities and strong holds, their defence must have been imputed to God, who only is the k 1.413 rock the fortress and deliverer of his, from whom they may find salvation; that they can∣not save or secure them, but are together with them, destroyed, is from him. All things, both for safety and destruction, are by him ordered, and he therefore never to be for∣gotten through vain hopes and confidence in any other. They have forgotten him, there∣fore shall all this evil come upon them, and their strong holds shall not secure them. There is here a little difference, concerning the per∣sons whose cities and whose palaces are here spoken of, because literally 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bearau will signify, his cities, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 armenoteha, her palaces. R. Tanchum saith it should be regularly 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 armenotau in the masculine gender, his palaces, and so would they both agree to one viz. Judah and others think it solved by considering that proper names of people, as we have before seen, are indifferently put in either gender, and the affixe therefore in either may be referred to Judah, l 1.414 others think the first referred to Ju∣dah and the second to Israel: no doubt they are both threatned, as both peccant, and what should befall one, should befall the o∣ther; so that if spoken of one, it would give to conceive the same of the other, and there is no need of standing here on this Grammar nicety. Aben Ezra refers the latter, not to the people but to the cities viz. to the pala∣ces of every one of their cities.

Notes

• a 1.1

  L. de Dieu.
• b 1.2

  Tremel. Capito.
• c 1.3

  By a Synecdoche. Grot. Rivet.
• d 1.4

  Lud. de Dieu.
• e 1.5

  Jer. 4.5.-16.
• f 1.6

  Calv. Rivet.
• g 1.7

  R. Tanch. Abarb. Drus. Men. Tarn.
• h 1.8

  Pagn, Munster.
• i 1.9

  Calv.
• k 1.10

  Jerom, Theop ylact. Lyra. Abarb. Ribera.
• l 1.11

  Cyril.
• m 1.12

  Mercer. Mont. See Chr. à Castro,
• n 1.13

  Pisc. and see Chr. a Castro.
• o 1.14

  Jerom. Theophylact. Cyril. Mercer. Rib. &c.
• p 1.15

  Abarb.
• q 1.16

  Mercer.
• r 1.17

  Id.
• s 1.18

  Pet. à Fig. &c.
• t 1.19

  Calv. Rivet.
• v 1.20

  Abarb. Merc. Menoch.
• x 1.21

  Pisc. Rivet. Grot.
• y 1.22

  See Chr. a Castro. Rivet.
• z 1.23

  He intimates thereby 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sp••edy falling on. R. Tanch.
• a 1.24

  Bochart. J. Hen. Ursin. Not. Anonym.
• b 1.25

  So Mercer renders this word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c.
• w 1.26

  1 Kin. 18.
• c 1.27

  Except his words also should be read in the Indicative mood, The enemies fly and make hast, &c. as Capito seems to have read them, and so it would be the same with the first.
• d 1.28

  Grot. Stokes.
• e 1.29

  See Beza.
• f 1.30

  Lud. de Dieu.
• g 1.31

  Polyglot. London: and so Cyril, and Jerom have.
• h 1.32

  Francford, Wechel, and in most saith Drus.
• i 1.33

  Drus. Shind. Cappel. &c. See Buxt. Vindic.
• k 1.34

  Trem. Grot. Rivet. Capp. &c,
• l 1.35

  R. Tanchum on Habb. 24.
• m 1.36

  Ten such places are u••ted in the Masora at the beginning of Deuter. viz. Jud. 20.13. 2 Sam. 8.3. and 16.23, and 18.20. 2 Ki. 19.30.—37. Jer. 31.38. and 50.29. Ruth. 3.5.—17.
• n 1.37

  Of the signification of the word Pashäu, rendred here, have trespassed, see on c. 7.12.
• o 1.38

  And see vv. 15.16, &c.
• p 1.39

  Tarnov.
• q 1.40

  Jerom. Rabbi Salomo, Grot.
• r 1.41

  Rivet.
• s 1.42

  Kiwchi.
• t 1.43

  Jun. Trem.
• u 1.44

  Rivet.
• w 1.45

  Kimchi, and see Abarb. Munst.
• x 1.46

  Vat.
• y 1.47

  Trem. and see Pareus.
• z 1.48

  R. Sal. Ab. Ezra. Kimchi, R. Tanchum.
• a 1.49

  Jerom. Lud. de Dieu.
• b 1.50

  See Tremel. and Rivet.
• c 1.51

  Grot. Tarnov.
• d 1.52

  c. 7.14.
• e 1.53

  c. 7.9.
• f 1.54

  Mercer also seems to incline that way.
• g 1.55

  Lam. 2.7. Ps. 43.2. 44.9. 74.1. &c. Zach. 10.6. So in Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• h 1.56

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Abu Walid.
• i 1.57

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Id.
• k 1.58

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. R. Tanch. on Lam. 2.7. and 3.17.
• l 1.59

  See Calv. here c. 6. v, 5.
• m 1.60

  Bar Ali, and Bar Bahlul: and so the Hebr. Ar. Glossary saith. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 also to signifie.
• n 1.61

  Jer, Ab. Ezr. Kimchi. Abarb. Tig.
• o 1.62

  Ps. 145.9.
• p 1.63

  Mat. 19.17.
• q 1.64

  Calv. Riv. Pisc. verbum & cul••um Dei. Merc.
• r 1.65

  See Abarb. from the ancient Rabbins.
• s 1.66

  Trem. Bonum pro bonitate, probitate, & rectitudine ponitur.
• t 1.67

  Ps. 37.27. and Ps. 34.14.
• v 1.68

  Drus.
• w 1.69

  Rivet.
• x 1.70

  Jerom.
• y 1.71

  Petr. à Fig.
• z 1.72

  Gtot.
• a 1.73

  Levit. 26.25.
• b 1.74

  Deutr. 28.49.
• c 1.75

  And so the printed Arabick.
• d 1.76

  And see the Syriac.
• e 1.77

  See Steph. and other Dictionaries.
• f 1.78

  Origen in Chr. à Castro. Theophylact.
• g 1.79

  Chr. à Castro.
• h 1.80

  See Ribera.
• i 1.81

  Petr. à Fig.
• k 1.82

  Grot.
• l 1.83

  Abarb.
• m 1.84

  Drus.
• n 1.85

  Veil.
• o 1.86

  Kimchi. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• p 1.87

  Trem. Pisc. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimebi.
• q 1.88

  Petr. à Fig.
• s 1.89

  1 Sam. 12, 12.
• t 1.90

  Petr. à Fig.
• v 1.91

  1 Sam. 9.16, 17.
• w 1.92

  Ibid. c. 10.9.
• x 1.93

  v. 24,
• y 1.94

  Calv. Rivet.
• z 1.95

  To whom to appropriate the words, the Geneva English hath in the sing. number, a King. Merc. Pisc. Tarnov.
• a 1.96

  Kimch. Abarb.
• b 1.97

  Jo. 13.27.
• c 1.98

  1 Kin. 12.28.
• d 1.99

  v. 15.
• e 1.100

  1 Kin. 11.11.
• f 1.101

  Jun. Trem.
• g 1.102

  See Estius.
• h 1.103

  2 Kin. 9.13, 14.
• i 1.104

  There c. 10.31.
• k 1.105

  Tirin. Grot. and see Rivet.
• l 1.106

  Merc, and see Tarnov.
• m 1.107

  Rivet.
• n 1.108

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• o 1.109

  See above on c. ••.17. Kimchi radic. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• p 1.110

  Trem. Singularis numerus in verbo ad gentem totam accommodatur, de qua modo generaliter est locutus.
• q 1.111

  Jun. Trem. see Calv.
• r 1.112

  Pisc.
• s 1.113

  Grot. Drus.
• t 1.114

  Vat. Zanch. Petr. a Fig. Chr. à Castro.
• u 1.115

  Riv. Tarnov.
• w 1.116

  Zanch.
• x 1.117

  Pareus.
• y 1.118

  Zanchi likewise.
• z 1.119

  As if it sounded, from being remembred by me.
• a 1.120

  R. Sal. Ab. Ezra. Kimchi. Abarb.
• b 1.121

  Tremel. Rivet.
• c 1.122

  vv. 5, 6.
• d 1.123

  Jer. Trem. Petr. a Fig. &c. Ne{que} enim hac ratione fecerunt ut perirent, sed quia fecerunt, ideo perierunt.
• e 1.124

  Hutcheson.
• f 1.125

  See Kimchi.
• g 1.126

  Tremelius. Rivet.
• h 1.127

  Petr. à Fig. Drus.
• i 1.128

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Abu Walid speaks.
• k 1.129

  So 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Arab. is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to thrust, or put away. Kamus.
• l 1.130

  R. Sal. Trem. God hath cast you off, O Samaritans, for the iniquity of the calves.
• m 1.131

  Schindler.
• n 1.132

  Beliquit vitulus ruus Samariam. Cappel. Crit. p. 359.
• o 1.133

  Jun. Tr. Lively, Par.
• p 1.134

  Ast ey cast off good, v. 3. so the evil, the calves, that they chose, shall now cast off them. and occasion their thrusting out of the land. See Dutch notes
• q 1.135

  Trem.
• r 1.136

  Drus. and Greek Lexicon.
• s 1.137

  Trem. Zanch. &c.
• t 1.138

  Jun. Trem.
• u 1.139

  Cappel. Ribera. Chr. à Castro.
• w 1.140

  Pelican.
• x 1.141

  As Calv. v. 3. Recessit procul.
• y 1.142

  Vindic. p. 737.
• * 1.143

  Crit. p. 572.
• z 1.144

  Pelican.
• a 1.145

  Petr. à Fig. and see Moreh Nebochim. l. 1. c. 54. and Pisc.
• b 1.146

  Maimon. Moreh. Neb. l. 1. c. 36. see Kimchi,
• * 1.147

  Pet. à Fig.
• c 1.148

  See the same, and Abarb. Vat. Grot. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Myanger is vehement against Israel. MS. Ar.
• d 1.149

  Tarnov.
• e 1.150

  Zanch. see Is. 1. the last v.
• f 1.151

  Habet Possum aliquando post se Accu∣sativum, sed hoc non nisi per subauditionem alterius Verbi. Calep.
• g 1.152

  Tarnov.
• h 1.153

  Lively Drus.
• i 1.154

  Jun. Trem. Glass.
• k 1.155

  Grot.
• l 1.156

  Tarnov.
• m 1.157

  Pagnin.
• n 1.158

  Buxt. from Kimchi. Gr. l. 2. c. 3. and Glass. Gr. S. l. 3. tr. 3. c. 44. Infinitivum venit pro Nomine, & Nomen pro Infinitivo.
• n 1.159

  Trem. Pareus.
• o 1.160

  Cappel. CrIt. p. 236. l. 4. c. 6.
• p 1.161

  See Oecolamp. Brenn.
• q 1.162

  Jerom.
• * 1.163

  Tig.
• r 1.164

  Vulg. Lat. and many others.
• s 1.165

  Zanchi,
• t 1.166

  Jerom. Calv. Grot.
• v 1.167

  1 Ki. 11.5.—7. and 2 Kin. 23.13.
• w 1.168

  Calv. Tarn.
• x 1.169

  And see Rivet.
• y 1.170

  Diodati.
• z 1.171

  Cappel. Crit. p. 236.
• a 1.172

  Zanchi.
• b 1.173

  Tremel.
• c 1.174

  As it is manifest t••at he took counsel of the people about it. 1 Kin. 12.28.
• d 1.175

  Deut. 26.17, 18,
• e 1.176

  As he objected to their forefathers. Deut. 34, 17.
• f 1.177

  Jer. 10.3.
• g 1.178

  The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Charash, signifying either of them, any workmen.
• h 1.179

  Is. 44.17.
• i 1.180

  ib. v. 20.
• k 1.181

  Calvin.
• l 1.182

  Pagn.
• m 1.183

  Jun. Trem.
• n 1.184

  Tarnov.
• o 1.185

  Drus. The MS. Arab. hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in truth, or assuredly, except that be added to the former words, and this omitted.
• p 1.186

  Munst. Merc.
• q 1.187

  Pare.
• * 1.188

  In asserum scobinas. Merc.
• r 1.189

  Abu Wal. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. R. Tanch. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Kimchi here, and in Radic.
• s 1.190

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Tanch.
• t 1.191

  R. Sal. •• Kimchi.
• v 1.192

  Mercer.
• w 1.193

  Kimch. Abarb.
• x 1.194

  Munst. Jun.
• y 1.195

  Pagn.
• z 1.196

  Merc
• a 1.197

  See Vat. Calv.
• b 1.198

  Tig.
• c 1.199

  See Diodati.
• d 1.200

  Carol. Veil.
• e 1.201

  Jaubari. Kamus. Ebn Athir. &c
• f 1.202

  Grot.
• g 1.203

  Num. 31.50.
• h 1.204

  R. Tanch.
• i 1.205

  Exod. 32.20.
• k 1.206

  See also his book Morshed.
• l 1.207

  And addes his note, that be takes the word as from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shebi, captivity.
• m 1.208

  See Nobilius, and Petr. à Fig. &c. Why in Pool they are rendred transitively, instabile reddens, and, in gyrum agens, may be examined,
• n 1.209

  Cappel. p. 344.
• o 1.210

  Buxtorf. Vindic. p. 699.
• p 1.211

  See Jerom Greek Bib. Francford. 1597. novit.
• q 1.212

  See something of the signification of the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on Micah 2.4.
• r 1.213

  See Selden, de Diis Syris. l. 1. c. 4. and Bochart, de Animal. l. 2. c. 34.
• s 1.214

  Pag. Munst. Tig.
• t 1.215

  Capito and see Zanchi.
• u 1.216

  Vulg. Lat.
• w 1.217

  Trem. Pare. a••d see Mercer.
• x 1.218

  Jun. Trem.
• y 1.219

  Vat. Zanca. Pisc.
• z 1.220

  Mercer.
• a 1.221

  Zanchi.
• b 1.222

  In literis sacris arare & seminare, significat operam, Vat.
• c 1.223

  Calv. Trem. Zanch. see Capito.
• d 1.224

  Grot.
• e 1.225

  Galat. 6.7.
• f 1.226

  Sicut unum semen multa semina, ita parrus ventus magnam vim tempestatum affert. Oecolamp. and see Ribera, and Tarn.
• g 1.227

  Pisc. see Jer. 4.13. and 51.1.
• h 1.228

  Lyra, Pet. à Fig.
• i 1.229

  Turbinem ex vento sato metere, nihil est quàm ex inutili & vana opera malum acquirere. Lively.
• k 1.230

  Kirch. Conc.
• l 1.231

  Drus.
• m 1.232

  Calv. Zanchi. Tarnov. and see Pare.
• n 1.233

  Marc. 4.28.
• o 1.234

  To which answers in Syriac 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• p 1.235

  Kimchi hist. and in Rad. and AbuWal, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• q 1.236

  See Zanchi.
• r 1.237

  Interlin. Seges erit carens germine, non factura farinam. Cast.
• s 1.238

  Grot. Distingue sic, Gul∣musstans non est in eo germen, neque pr••feret farinam, &c. Tig. Seges stans, non germinabit, nec reddet farinam.
• t 1.239

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• v 1.240

  Zanchi also and Rivet intimate, that they may be so taken.
• w 1.241

  According to what is denounced in the law, Deut. 28.16, 17, 18-33. The fruit of thy hand and all thy labours, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up.
• x 1.242

  Vat.
• y 1.243

  Pagnin, as cited by Rivet. See Interlin. in Marg.
• z 1.244

  Capito.
• a 1.245

  Jerom.
• b 1.246

  And is so rendred by many, as the LXX, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Vulg. devoratus est. Syriac, and both Arab. Versions, Chald. &c.
• c 1.247

  Capito. Trem. Drus. Grot. Rivet. &c.
• d 1.248

  Trem. Petr. à Fig. Oecol. Merc. see 2 King. 15.19, 20. which Diodati thinks had respect to; and see Dutch notes.
• e 1.249

  Chald. LXx. Vulg. Lat. Syr. Arab. both &c
• f 1.250

  Trem. Grot. Nunc intra breve tempus.
• g 1.251

  Abarb. In ipsa etiam captivitate. Zanchi.
• h 1.252

  Kimchi, Diodati.
• i 1.253

  And c. 48.58. of Moab.
• k 1.254

  See Kimchi on these words.
• l 1.255

  Tarnov.
• m 1.256

  And so Castalio well enough renders it, proficiscuntur.
• n 1.257

  And so Abarbinel takes it.
• o 1.258

  See Chr. à Castro, Ribera, Menoch. Grot.
• p 1.259

  Which see collected in Bochart.
• r 1.260

  Lively.
• s 1.261

  The masculine and feminine being indifferently used,
• q 1.262

  And c. 24.5.
• t 1.263

  Damiri in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• u 1.264

  The root in Arabic being the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here in Hebrew.
• w 1.265

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Concord. Heb.
• x 1.266

  Lively. Bochart.
• y 1.267

  Zanchi.
• z 1.268

  So likewise Castalio
• a 1.269

  Pag.
• b 1.270

  Tig. Munst.
• b 1.271

  As Aben Ezra seems likewise to do.
• c 1.272

  Pagn.
• d 1.273

  A wildess among men.
• e 1.274

  Other copies have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but ill, as Cappel thinks.
• f 1.275

  Although Tremell. in his own notes goes the former way.
• g 1.276

  Mercer. Judah is so compared Jer. 2.24.
• h 1.277

  Jun. Trem.
• i 1.278

  Qui sibi soli prospicit, nec aliorum salutem curat. Bochart.
• k 1.279

  Jonah 2.8.
• l 1.280

  See c. 2.12. c. 9.1.
• m 1.281

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. R. Tanchum.
• n 1.282

  Though R. Tanch. will have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be derived from that. on c. 2.12.
• o 1.283

  So Jun. and Trem. amores.
• p 1.284

  So the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The people whom they have loved.
• q 1.285

  Figura loquendi non insolens. Drus. So he and Trem. and Tarnov. take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahabim for Ohebim, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lovers, or men of loves.
• r 1.286

  Cappell. Crit. p. 327.
• s 1.287

  Vindic. p. 721.
• t 1.288

  Drus.
• v 1.289

  Tarnov.
• w 1.290

  Lively.
• x 1.291

  Tig. Jun. Trem.
• y 1.292

  Pag. Interlin. Rivet.
• z 1.293

  Chr. à Castro, whose Paraphrase, taking in the former v. is,

  They are gone to the Assyrians to seek help, that they might be free as a a wild ass wan∣dring in the wilderness to seek pasture, and have by Presents sought their friendship; but I will cause those very nations, whom they shall oblige by their presents, to come, as if they were hired with a reward, and to gather themselves against them.
• a 1.294

  And so some ancient Rabbins, as Kimchi notes, in Radic.
• b 1.295

  Drus. Cap.
• c 1.296

  Glass. Gram. num. marg. 301. and so on the preceding v.
• d 1.297

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 What shall it profit tham that they have hired &c. for now &c. Kimc. and Pagn. inserts in his translation, Non proderit.
• e 1.298

  So Is. 54.7. Jer. 31.10. and elsewhere.
• f 1.299

  Hos. 9.6.
• g 1.300

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 when the time for it shall come. R. Sal.
• h 1.301

  As first the As∣ssyrians, then the Egyptians against them. Rivet from Jun.
• i 1.302

  Trem. Vat. see Chr. à Castro. Petr. à Fig. Grot. Jun.
• k 1.303

  Mercer.
• l 1.304

  R. Sal. Ab. Ezra.
• m 1.305

  Rivet. Tarnov.
• n 1.306

  Trem.
• o 1.307

  Drus. Riv.
• p 1.308

  Tarnov.
• q 1.309

  Chr. à Castro. Menoch.
• r 1.310

  Lud. de Dieu. So Tirinus also: as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 also in the Arabic, signifies, to lay hold on, and in the Passive voice, to die, i. e. to be laid hold on by death.
• s 1.311

  Abarb. Zanch. Riv.
• t 1.312

  2 Kin. 15.20. and 17.3.
• v 1.313

  R. Tanch. Kimchi.
• w 1.314

  Dolebunt paulisper propter onera quae reges Israelis eorumque praefecti illis imponent, ut pecuniam regi Assyriorum promissam appendant. Brenn.
• x 1.315

  See Tarnov.
• y 1.316

  So the Latin translat▪ ut ungant, but Mercer, ab ungendo.
• z 1.317

  Petr. à Fig.
• a 1.318

  Or perhaps, within a little while, I would take away, &c.
• b 1.319

  Grot.
• c 1.320

  Kimchi rad. and see Buxt. Thes. Gram. l. 1 c. 40.
• d 1.321

  Which yet is observed to be absent in many Editions. Buxt. there, and Drus. as it is in a MS. which I consulted.
• e 1.322

  Rad. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• f 1.323

  Petr. à Fig.
• g 1.324

  Tirin.
• h 1.325

  See in Chr. à Castro.
• i 1.326

  Liberum erit unicuique aliud verbum supplere, dummodo significatio conveniat; satis enim con∣stat imperfectam esse orationem ex ipsa constructione. Trem.
• k 1.327

  Trem. in the text.
• l 1.328

  See in Chr. à Castro.
• m 1.329

  Pisc.
• n 1.330

  Brenn.
• o 1.331

  Jun. Trem.
• p 1.332

  Tig. in marg. Vat. in ••••. and see Rivet.
• q 1.333

  Mercer.
• r 1.334

  Tarnov.
• s 1.335

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chata, to sin, Chitte, to cleanse or purge from sin; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sin, and, a sacrifice for sin, and punisnment for sin: as Gen. 4.7. and Zach. 14.19.
• t 1.336

  Zanchi.
• u 1.337

  Pareus.
• w 1.338

  How great a sin it was thought of old to make any other, appears by what we read Jos. 22.16. and 22.23.
• * 1.339

  Jun. Trem.
• x 1.340

  Trem.
• y 1.341

  Zanchi, Rivet, Diodati, Dutch Notes.
• z 1.342

  Compare Rom. 1.28. Rev. 22.11. and see Eze. 20.29. Act. 7.42.
• a 1.343

  Aben Ezra, Kimchi, Abarb.
• b 1.344

  Chr. à Castro in his Paraphrase.
• c 1.345

  1 Ki. 16.32.
• d 1.346

  Pisc. Sunt ipsi ad pecca∣tum, i. e. ad poenam peccati: and see Calvin,
• e 1.347

  In scandalum, i. e. ruinam. Petr. à Fig.
• f 1.348

  See Drus. Piscator, Dutch Notes.
• * 1.349

  Pisc.
• g 1.350

  Rivet.
• h 1.351

  Delicta. Nobil. Drus.
• i 1.352

  Edit. Francf.
• k 1.353

  Petr. à Fig.
• l 1.354

  Tig. Grot. Drus.
• m 1.355

  Trem,
• n 1.356

  See Kimchi. Capito. Merc, Jun. Tr,
• o 1.357

  Kimch.
• p 1.358

  Capito.
• q 1.359

  Jerom. Lyra. Arias Mont. Oecolamp.
• r 1.360

  Riber.
• s 1.361

  Rivet.
• t 1.362

  Trem.
• v 1.363

  Munst.
• w 1.364

  Calv.
• x 1.365

  Pagn. Rivet.
• y 1.366

  Interlin.
• z 1.367

  Lively. Drus.
• a 1.368

  Jun. Pi••c.
• * 1.369

  Tig.
• b 1.370

  Capito. Oecol.
• * 1.371

  Mcrcer.
• * 1.372

  See above c. 6.6.
• b 1.373

  Oecol.
• c 1.374

  Rivet.
• d 1.375

  As Elias nores concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Napshi, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Naphsho, Ps. 24. in hisnotes upon Kimchies radices,
• e 1.376

  Or as some copies, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, his multitude, as if they followed the Cetib,
• f 1.377

  Pisc.
• g 1.378

  Vulg. Lat.
• h 1.379

  And. 2 Chron. 34.
• i 1.380

  Kimchi.
• k 1.381

  Petr. à Fig.
• l 1.382

  Ps. 147.20.
• m 1.383

  And Num. 3.4.
• n 1.384

  See Prov. 15.8. and 21.27. Jer. 6.20.
• o 1.385

  Pisc, Lud. de Dieu.
• p 1.386

  He saith also that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 killing, for which in Golius's copy seems to have been 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 wind; I think, ill: three good copies have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• q 1.387

  See Prov. 30.15.
• r 1.388

  Drus.
• s 1.389

  Though in the Polyglot. the first words be so put, as if they belonged to the preceding verse.
• * 1.390

  Bib. Francf. 1597.
• t 1.391

  Pagnin.
• v 1.392

  Vulg. Lat.
• w 1.393

  Grot. Stokes, and see R. Salomo.
• x 1.394

  Vat. Drus. Trem. •• c.
• y 1.395

  If they were whole burnt offerings, they ought not to have earen of the flesh, if Eucharistical sacrifices, they had their share.
• z 1.396

  So R. Salomo.
• a 1.397

  Ea, vel eos. Drus.
• * 1.398

  Of this word see on chap. 1.4. and 2.13.
• x 1.399

  See Ab. Ezra. Jerom. Jun. Trem. Merc. Drus. Tarnov. Grot.
• y 1.400

  Oecol. Liveley, Rivet.
• z 1.401

  Lyra, Piscat. Zanchi, and see Dutch notes.
• a 1.402

  Zanchi, Pare. see River.
• b 1.403

  See Petr. à Fig. and Rivet.
• c 1.404

  See Drus.
• d 1.405

  Et, pro Nam. Grot.
• e 1.406

  Jun. Trem. Tarnov.
• f 1.407

  Rivet. Pare.
• * 1.408

  1 Sam. 12.6. where a MS. Arab. renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and R. Tanchum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 who chose. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimchi.
• g 1.409

  Trem. Rivet.
• * 1.410

  Trem.
• h 1.411

  Kimchi.
• i 1.412

  and 2 Chron. 36.19. and Jer. 39.8.
• k 1.413

  Ps. 18.2. 1 Sam. 22.
• l 1.414

  Abarb. Jun. Grot.