A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

CHAPTER IX.

VERSE 1. Rejoice not, O Israel, for joy, as other people: for thou hast gone a whoring f••••m thy God, thou hast loved a reward upon every corn∣floor.

HE proceeds in this chapter, as before he had done, in taxing and reproving Is∣rael for their sins, and denouncing heavy judgments and punishments on them continu∣ing therein. To make way to these, in the first place he seems to take notice of such behaviour as was in them, or at least, they were prone to, as argued them not duely sen∣sible of either their sins, or the ill consequents of them, and the condition they were at pre∣sent, and like to be, in, if they did not change their behaviour, and checks them for it or restrains them from it in the first words, Re∣joice not, o Israel, for joy as other people: why such behavior would not become them, he then shews, in this 1. v. by laying first be∣fore them their sin; then by minding them of such judgments as hung over their heads, v. 2. both being reasons why they should not so behave themselves viz. not with that mirth and jollity, which were tokens of security and unconcernedness.

His forbidding them thus to rejoice and indulge themselves to unseasonable mirth, as it seems hence probable that they did, or would do, gives occasion of questioning and conjecturing when and why this was spoken to them by the Prophet. Abarbinel thinks it to concern their condition which they were, (or should be,) in, in their captivity after they were carried from their own country and dispersed there among other nations, coun∣selling them how there to behave themselves; as if he should say, if God should give a blessing in the land of the nations and fulness of joy, so that the people should rejoice in their blessings and plentiful increase of all things, yet rejoice not thou O Israel, as they do; for thou hast gone a whoring from thy God after Idols whom thou hast served.

Among Christian expositors also Arias Mon∣tanus takes the same way, as if the meaning were, Rejoice not O Israel, as other people, who yet retain the form of a people, a seeing thou ceasest to be a people, being dispersed among all nations.

But the departure from their own coun∣trey being spoken of as a thing yet to come v. 3. and other circumstances of the words weighed, they seem to concern and respect their behavior while they were yet at home in their own land. Others therefore conjecture that they were spoken at such a time when Israel was in such a state and condition as that they seemed to themselves to be secure from such evils as were by the Prophets threatned to them and to have cause of re∣joicing and indulging to more than ordina∣ry joy, mirth and jollity, by reason of such good things as they enjoyed and hoped still to enjoy. b Some therefore think it might be spoken in the time of Jeroboam the second, under whom they obtained victories over their enemies and prospered 2 Kin. 14.25, 26, 27. or in the time c of Menahem who made a league with Pul King of Assyria and for a while procured them peace 2 Kin. 15.19. d Others think it more probably spoken un∣der Hosea their last King, when their destru∣ction was near at hand. But here being no∣thing concerning the time particularly ex∣press'd, it will be sufficient to conceive that the Prophet (or God, by the Prophet) seeing the insolency of them in taking to themselves occasion of mirth and jollity from any false grounds, and so, securely running on in their Idolatrous courses and sin without any re∣morse or fear, thus seasonably checks them, Rejoice not, O Israel, &c. the import of which seems to be, not so much a prohibition of all rejoicing to them, as a declaration that for their rejoicing they had now no grounds, and withall that their joy should not long last, his bidding Rejoice not, importing as much as, or including, thou hast O Israel, e no cause of rejoicing, and f thou shalt not rejoice, be∣cause of what thou dost and of what shall be∣fall thee, as he had before threatned them c. 2.11. I will cause all her mirth to cease.

But we shall the better judge of this, by taking into consideration the expressions here used, in order, Rejoice not O Israel, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El gil, for joy. The like expression in the He∣brew is used Job. 3.22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hasemechim ele gil, where ours render it, who rejoice exceedingly, which rendring seems

a little to differ from this here, to rejoice for joy seeming to import, because of occasion of joy presenting it self, or conceived; but to rejoice exceedingly, to express in outward ge∣sture or signs of exultation the joy inwardly conceived on any such occasion, which is con∣sequent on the other. The words in the ori∣ginal here do literally sound ad exultationem, to exultation (or the like) which seems strictly more to agree with the latter expression than the former, but not so necessarily but that it admits of the former, and others also something different, through the various use of the par∣ticle g 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El not only for ad to, but for apud at, super or propter for juxta according to, and the like, tending much to the same purpose. The chiefe which we find besides that in our translation given are, First that which agrees with that which in Job as we said, they give, ad exultationem, to exultation, i. e. h magnopere, greatly, i exultanter so as to be transported to extraordinary expressions of joy, which k some will have to be the import of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gil. Secondly that which l others will have to be the import of ad exultandum or ad exultationem, to wit ubi sese exultandi materia obtulerit, when any matter of exulting or re∣joicing shall offer it self, as if it should be ren∣dred, at rejoicing, i. e. m at any time or occa∣sion of joy; so Kimchi, If there shall happen any matter of joy, as any wedding or the like, there is no reason for thee to rejoice; and with this doth that in our text well agree and that which others render, n in exultatione. Thirdly that which they give who render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El, by secundum exultationem, according to the exulta∣tion, viz. such as is that of other people, so making it a particle or note of similitude and so coupling it with the following words, that o they should not rejoice as other nations do exult.

Many of the ancient translators, for making what they thought to be meant the plainer, give it not literally by a Noun as it is in the Hebrew, but by a verb of like signification to the former or which adds somthing to the de∣gree or outward expression of that rejoicing which it denotes, according to the import of the Hebrew Noun, and taking in the negative Particle as having influence on both; so the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The LXXII. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The printed Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the vulgar Latin, Noli laetari Israel, noli exultare, all which agree in one common mean∣ing Rejoice not O Israel, nor exult thou. Now that the occasion of their unanimously so ren∣dring the words, should be a reading, which they found different from that which we now have, it is not probable. If so many copies as they used did read otherwise then ours now do, it is strange that there should none be now found in which it is so. Yet Cappel, as to the Chaldee, Greek and Latin thinks they all for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El Gil did read, al gil, with the same negative Particle which is be∣fore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tishmah, at the beginning of the verse, as if it were here again repeated and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gil, were not a Noun signifying, Exulta∣tion, but the Imperative Mood signifying exult thou. But the learned q Buxtorf shews how that reading which he would thence con∣firm, is an expression not known in the He∣brew tongue, in which that negative or pro∣hibitive particle requires a Verb of the Future Tense to be joined with it, and is not found joined with an Imperative. I suppose it therefore better to think, that they did read no otherwise than we now do, but thought the meaning, in that language in which they were to give it, more plainly expressed by a Verb then a Noun, and not to have put a ne∣gative particle before it because they found any such in the Hebrew repeated, but because they looked on that in the beginning put, to influence the whole clause, which they thought in the language in which they wrote and the way of giving the meaning which they took, would be made plainer by repeating or again expressing, it, although without being expressed, it might be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from the former words understood, as in the MS. Arabick translation in which the import of the Noun is expressed to the same sense by a Verb, yet without putting a negative be∣fore it; the author thereof rendring these words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 do not O Israel, rejoice, and exult, which is as much as what the other say, do not rejoice, and do not exult. But, not to make more scruples than need, the words are according to all, a pro∣hibition to them of indulging themselves to mirth and jollity and expressions thereof, which seems to have in it the force of a de∣claration or giving warning to them that their condition if heeded to was such as made it altogether unseasonable for them to give them∣selves, on any ordinary occasion of rejoicing, to extraordinary mirth and jollity, but rather to grieve or mourn and be sorry, as under the expression of not rejoicing for joy, r some observe to be implied and comprehended, and that for the reasons following.

But before we come to them there is an

expression concerning either the manner or oc∣casion of such rejoycing which is prohibited to them, and that is in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ca∣ammin as peoples; which to make plainer our Translators insert other, as other people, as any other people, who having occasion of rejoyc∣ing as for victory, peace, plenty, or any good befallen them, do usually express their joy in outward signs of mirth. The words are capa∣ble of being interpreted; either, in such man∣ner as other people do, or, on such occasion as they do, and that either to signify that such things as to other people are occasions of rejoycing, ought not to be so to them; or else that they have not, or shall not have such occasions. If they be interpreted in re∣spect to the manner, then will they seem to be a prohibition to them of any profane, carnall or exorbitant way of rejoycing such as among the heathen nations and people that had no right knowledge of God or rule of his law to direct and moderate them in their actions, was usu∣ally found; their rejoycing when any publick occasion of joy presented it self by reason of their ignorance in such kind, being commonly peccant s in respect to the cause, manner or measure, or the end: 1. That they make those worldly carnall good things from which they take occasion of joy, the highest in their aime and thoughts, without respect or consi∣deration had of spirituall ad heavenly good things which are the matter of true joy; not looking up with thankfullness to God the giver of those things, or acknowledging them as his gift, and bounty; 2. In that they usu∣ally therein transgress the rules of modesty, sobriety and temperance; 3. In that they do not direct their rejoycing to the praise and glo∣ry of him who hath given them that occasion, but for setting forth and extolling their own abilities, their own wisdom or power, or (as in those times) their false Gods in bringing to pass those things which so happily succeeded to them, and afforded them such occasions of mirth and gladness. But surely such rejoyc∣ing had been unlawful for both Israel and o∣ther nations at any time, that it might not seem needful to dehort Israel in particular from it. The words considered with respect to the reason given of this prohibition, in the following, seem rather to shew that it was, as things now stood, unseasonable, for Israel to rejoice with such joy as in other Nations might seem allowable, and therefore to have re∣spect to the occasion rather than the manner, viz. to warn them that, being as they were, or having done as they had, they should not think that such things as were to other people lawfull and seasonable occasions of joy, ought to be so to them, but that there were greater occasions of contrary behaviour to them; as in the next words he shews, subjoyning as a rea∣son of this prohibition, For thou hast gone a where∣ing from thy God &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci, For, or because; so ours render it, with many others, as be∣ginning a new clause, wherein is, (as we said) contained a reason of what was said in the former; but there be who render it otherwise, to wit, t quod scorteris or v de eo quod scortatus sis &c. that, or in that, thou goest a whoring from thy God, so making the subjoyned words to constitute one cause with the former, and to express rather the matter of the forbidden joy, than the cause why it was forbidden to them, viz. That they should not rejoyce in that they had cast of Gods service, and followed after I∣dols, as if by doing so they were free from him and secure from his judgements, and might do what they list. w But this could not probably seem a matter of rejoycing to them, but cer∣tainly was a just reason to hinder them from it; and therefore we may well look upon it, as a causal pointing it out as a reason to them why they should refrain from it, even for this rea∣son because they had gone a whoreing from their God &c. And surely a weighty and forcible reason it is. How shall he that hath not God with him, or doth what necessarily excludes his favour, possibly find in any thing that he can mean while rejoyce in, find solid ground for true joy, or true rejoycing? In his favourable presence is fulness of joy, true, solid, lasting joy; but without it all mirth and jollity is quickly turned into sorrow, yea it self made a cause of grief and sorrow. It is but such at best as that in the preachers language describ∣ed, Eccl. 2.2. I said of laughter it is mad, and of mirth what doth it? and of which S. James speaking, (c. 4.9.) saith to them that unlaw∣fully indulge to it, Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to heaviness. For if they do not themselves so turn it, by ma∣ture repentance, it shall be so turned by Gods vengeance to them, it shall not long endure, and the end thereof shall be certain heaviness Prov. 14.13. Their forefathers are an example of this, who when they had gone a whoring after the golden calf in the wilderness, for a while (as now thinking all things should be well with them having gotten such a guide, seeing they had lost Moses or knew not what was become of him) rejoyced for joy, and indulged themselves, to eat and drink and play, Exod. 32.1.9. yet when they were brought to a better consideration of the mat∣ter, and heard what evil things God threat∣ned against them for such their wickedness, that they might prevent and avert them, saw that another course was to be taken, and in∣stead of their former rejoycing, they mourn∣ed,

and no man did put on him his ornaments Ex. 33.4. These their wicked posterity have∣ing imitated them in their Idolatry and like∣wise in their unlawful and exorbitant rejoyc∣ing in their wicked waies, ought also, if they would have hearkened to the Prophets duly reproving them and denouncing Gods heavy judgments against them, to imitate them in leaving off their heathenish rejoycing and turning it into penitent sorrow.

Thus Kimchi, for illustrating these words parallels this which they are here called on for, with what was done by their ancestors. Cer∣tainly the same reason that they had then for changing their mirth and those exorbitant ex∣pressions which were suitable to it, in regard that, on their forsaking God, he threatned to withdraw his presence from them, the same had these now, if they would but lay to heart how wickedly they had done in going a whoring from their God, and what great evils must necessarily come on it: and for this reason of their doings deservedly calls he on them not to rejoyce for joy, as other nations.

But was it not then unseasonable or unlaw∣full for other nations also, who knew not God, to rejoyce on such occasions as were accounted to be joyous, as outward prosperity, and plentifull increase of the fruits of the earth, (which if we look unto the following words in this and the next verse, may seem that chiefly here pointed to) seeing they did not have that respect to God and his good∣ness as they ought to have, for want of a right knowledge of him? This, besides what we have already seen concerning the meaning of this expression, may it be convenient to consider, that we may see the cogency of these words as a reason why Israel should not so rejoyce. To this therefore, according to what is by Expositors more generally agreed on, will be answered, that though such re∣joycing were not so well ordered and di∣rected by such nations as it ought to have been, by reason of their want of better knowledge of God, which they had never been rightly instructed in nor had meanes of, yet it was not unlawfull for them to make such common blessings of God occasions of rejoycing to themselves; nor sinned they in so making them to themselves; but what was both lawful and seasonable to them, was not so to Israel, in regard that they did or ought to have known God better than those did, and their offending in what they did, was worse than it was in the heathen nations. They did not righly know and acknowledge God in his benefits, because they never had been taught so to do: but these had his law to in∣struct them in a right knowledge of him, and their duty to him, and how to rejoyce aright in him and in the enjoyment of his blessings, yet wilfully and obstinately contracted ig∣norance, forsook him and went a whoring from him, ascribing to others what occasions of joy they received from him; and it was therefore a sin in them, at least unseasonable to them, to rejoyce therein as other people did, without being so much blamed for it or be∣ing made obnoxious to punishment for it: which may be illustrated by what he saith Amos 3.2. You only have I known of all the families of the earth, therefore will I punish you for all your iniquity. Their nearness to God made that in them to be an occasion of his severer dealing with them for deserting him, which in others whom he had never brought so near to himself, he would not so suddenly or severely punish. This the Jewish Expositors in their Expositions look on as the weight of this Expression. So R. Salomo, Rejoyce not O Israel as other people who never received my law, nor came into my portion; and Aben-Ezra, If any other Nation rejoyce when occasion of joy cometh to them, it is but just; because none of them hath gone a whoring from their God as thou hast done, as he saith Jer. 2.11. Hath a Nation changed their Gods which are no Gods? but my people hath changed their Glory for that which doth not profit. Jer. 2.11. So Kimchi also (as hath been already partly imitated) If any matter of joy, as a marriage or ought of the like kind, happen to you, there is no reason for thee is rejoyce as other people do, because they have not forsaken their Gods, but thou hast gone a whoring from thy God, and worshipped the Gods of the Nations; therefore for this reason ought∣est thou to mourn, and not to rejoyce for any joy, (or occasion of joy) as the generation of the Wilderness did after that Moses had reproved them in the matter of the Calf. So that the press∣ing force of this reason why they should not rejoyce for joy as other people, according to them, lies in this, that their condition was worse and more sinfull than that of other nations who did not in such occasions of joy duly acknowledge God, nor ground their joy on the sense of his favour because they never knew him, because these had known him, but wilfully forgot and forsooke him, had been owned by him and enjoyed him as an husband, and as their God by a peculiar right above all other nations, but like a lewd strum∣pet after all kindness shewed to them, and obligations by him laid upon them, yet went a whoring from him; so that though he might bear with other nations who did not duely acknowledge him, nor do what they did to his honor, yet they could not exspect that he should long bear with them for their falsness in his covenant, as x a married Woman com∣mitting adultery cannot but exspect worse punishment than an unmarried Woman who never plighted her troth to any.

The expression here used, thou hast gone a whoring from God, cannot but be understood, by any who hath read what goes before in this y Prophecy, to signify their forsaking God and his z service, to follow and serve Idols; and the Pronoun, thy, added, in, thy God, putting them in mind of that peculiar relation to himself which he had taken them into, greatly aggravates their sin, in farther description of which, and to shew their ex∣cess therein, he adds, thou hast loved a reward upon every corn floor; or as in the Margin, in every corn floor, which variety of reading they give because the proposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Al in the Hebrew, which they so translate, is capable of different significations as the sense requires, and is therefore looked upon as a causing some obscurity in these words, and is differently rendred by Interpreters as b cum, with, c super, upon, d in, in, e propter, for, f supra or plus∣quam, above or more than: But all these I think, except the last, will be of like force in making the meaning; for the having of which it will be convenient to remember how c. 2.12. this whorish Idolatrous Israel, not know∣ing (or not considering) that God gave her her corn and wine and oyle &c. (v. 8.) said of them that they were the rewards that her lovers (her Idols) had given her, and that therefore (v. 5.) she would go after her lovers that gave her her bread and her water &c. The word there rendred rewards is g 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ethnah the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ethnan here, (of the signification of which, somthing is said there, and more on c. 8.9.) The con∣sidering of those things said in that 2^d c. will help us in giving the meaning of what is said here, thou hast loved a reward upon all corn floors, viz. that they loved plenty and pro∣sperity, and therefore where and whensoever they received in plenty the fruits of the Earth, as particularly, for instance, corn, (which according to the use of those Countries they gathered together to some floor where it was threshed or troden out to be put up into the repositories) there rejoicing with the joy of harvest, they did celebrate their Idols, (instituting yearly feasts to their honour) in all lewd waies of their i worship, ascribing to them as a reward of their service, the good things which they had received, from a better giver. And what was this but a plain going a whoring from him, in the giving that ho∣nour and service which was due to him, to things most contrary to him, and which could not at all be profitable to them in any such way? So that well might he even for this reason, because they so sinned in giving to Idols the praise for what he alone had given them, and could not but thereby provoke his displeasure against them, forbid them to rejoice for joy in the enjoyment of those good things which they so used, as to turn them in the end necessarily for hurt to themselves, by provoking his judgements and pulling on themselves a curse by the ungrateful abuse of them.

kThere be who take to be understood by this reward, not so much the good things which they looked on as a reward to them from their Idols, as what they gave to them in acknowledgement of them viz. those first fruits and tenths or tithes and oblations which they should have offered to God; which to l others seems not so proper as to under∣stand what they received, not what they gave, though m both may be together well enough understood, and so they explain what was meant by their going a whoring from God. For making up this meaning or what is to the same purpose, will it be much one whe∣ther we say, upon, in, with, for, or at, every corn floor, they did what they did as acknowledging what was received to be from their Idols, and of them asking all in that kind. But what, as we said n some un∣derstand supra, above, or more than, all corn-floors, as if they loved what rewards they ex∣pected from their Idols, above all their plen∣ty of corn and other fruits of the earth which God gave them, I think makes no such clear sense, though so also it would prove them to have gone a whoring from God, and so to have reason not to rejoice as other people which had, though they rejoiced for the same things as they did, yet not used such false dealing to Godward. The reason is such as certainly is of great force, if well laid to heart. What greater reason can there be to curb and check joy and mirth in men from any the greatest outward occasions, than to consider that they are at enmity with God, and have not his favor and blessing with it, without which there can be no true comfort in any thing, nor security of its continuance to do them good? Yet usually are not carnal men so much moved and brought to repentance with the sense of their sins as necessary causes of Gods curse and anger, as they are with the effects thereof, any outward punishment or affliction for them sent upon them. So it seems to have been with Idolatrous h

Israel: and therefore if this be not sufficient to restrain them from rejoicing in their ways, to shew in how ill relation they stand with God, he improves this reason by adding to it another from those evils which their perverse behaviour shall necessarily and shortly pull up-them, in the words following,

v. 2. The floor and the wine-press shall not feed them; and the new wine shall fail in her.

The floor and the wine-press shall not feed them: Those good gifts of God which are common occasions, to all people who enjoy them, of rejoycing, as particularly abun∣dance of the fruits of the earth, it appears, Israel made so to themselves, but in so per∣verse a manner (while they rejoiced in them, not as blessings of God with joy directed to his honor, and to express thankfulness to him, but as gifts and rewards from their Idols and encouragements to run on in serving them to the great dishonor of his name), that their sin in so doing was indeed, and ought to have been to them, greater occasion of sorrow to them then the greatest plenty of those good things could be of joy and rejoycing. The being warned of this by the Prophets seeming not sufficient to make them sensible of their error, that they might correct it, and by penitent sorrow to render themselves capable of right rejoycing, God here threatens them to use another method, whereby he will evidence his own power, the vanity of their Idols, and their folly in forsaking him who only gave those good things and could take them away at his pleasure, to follow those who neither gave them, nor could continue them to them, but would necessarily cause them to be taken from them, viz. by depriving them of all occasions of any such joy at all, which is in these words expressed, The floor and the wine-press shall not feed &c. which are things without which there can be no outward occasion of mirth and re∣joycing; they are not consistent with hun∣ger and thirst. To deprive them of the en∣joyment of these is the same which he saith, c. 2.11. to cause their mirth to cease; and these words are a plain threat of depriving them thereof or of reaping good thereby; so as that it may appear to whom they be∣long, and by whose sole power they are ordered to them as he shall see fit, either for good or for punishment to them.

For understanding the present words we may likewise compare with them what is above said, c. 2.9. I will return and take a∣way my corn in the time thereof, and my wine in the season thereof, and c. 4.10. they shall eat and not have enough, and again c. 8.7. It (i. e. their corn that they have sown, literally un∣derstanding the words as we have seen some to do) hath no stalk, the bud shall yeild no meal; if so be it yeild, the strangers shall swallow it up. By which expressions we are given to wit of o several ways by which God can effect what he here threatneth, that the floor and the wine-press shall not feed men: as First, by his hindring the fruits of the earth to spring up and grow, that they should have any hope of good from them. Secondly, if they do grow up so far as to give them good hopes, yet then blasting those hopes, by blasting the corn or vines, or by some means corrupting them, that they grow not to ma∣turity, nor have in them kind meal or juice, for making bread and wine fit for nourish∣ment. Thirdly, if they do come to matu∣rity, and they seem to have in possession what they would expect from them, yet even then by laying his curse on them causing that they shall not yeild them good nourishment or satisfy them, or else sending on them such enemies or spoilers, as shall take it out of their hands, so that they shall not enjoy it or be the better for it.

Any of these means, by God made use of, would be sufficient to bring to pass what he here threatneth, that the floor and the wine∣press should not feed them, and the new wine should fail in her, viz. that there should be a failure of bread and wine or such things as conduced to a sufficient or comfortable live∣lihood, amongst which those are looked on as chiefe unto them. For if the corn, by any means hindred, do not grow up to have grain that may yeild meal for bread, nor the vine bring forth grapes to maturity, of which be∣ing pressed wine may be made, so that there be no corn to be brought to the floor, nor grapes to the wine-press, it will thereby ne∣cessarily be brought to pass that neither the one nor the other can feed them, nor they find from the one or the other what may nourish and suffice them; or if they do grow to maturity, but in great scarcity, and such measure as is deficient; or else in greater measure, but without Gods blessing which may make them profitable to them; or else when they should make use of them the ene∣my should snatch them (as it were) out of their mouths: the issue will still be the same, the bread which they expected from the floor, the wine which from the wine press, shall not satisfy their desires; that will not feed them, this will certainly fail them.

By which of the forementioned ways God will bring it to pass that it shall so be with them, it is not specified but in general said that it shall be so brought to pass; yet because in the expression are mentioned the floor and the wine-press, (to which the corn and the grapes are not brought till they be ripe) not the field and vineyard where they grow, it is thought by p some more convenient to be un∣derstood as a threat that even then, when they might think themselves secure of the en∣joyment of those things, and as in the fore∣going v. look on them as a reward by their Idols bestowed on them, God would deprive them of the use and enjoyment of them, by either substracting his blessing from them, or else causing them by the enemy (the Assy∣rians) to be snatched from them. Mean while the scope of the words is evident viz. to shew that those good things as bread and wine and things of like nature which are to men the staff of life and necessary comforts thereof, are the gift of God alone, and, by his blessing only, made beneficial and profit∣able to them; so that the Israelites greatly erred in ascribing them to their Idols, as re∣wards of their service to them, and in look∣ing on them as encouragements in serving them, and had therefore no reason while they so did, to joy and rejoice in them, which they should be made sensible of by being de∣prived of them, or of the comfort which they expected from them. To shew this depen∣dance of these on those foregoing words, some therefore add or supply in the beginning q Propterea, Therefore.

In the words is not much difficulty: some differences betwixt Interpreters concerning them we may take notice of. Whereas the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Goren by ours here rendred floor, and in the foregoing verse corn-floor, and so by others usually area, yet is by r others, rendred, in both verses horreum, a barn. I suppose there is by all meant but the same thing, viz. a place to which the corn is brought together to be threshed or troden out that so it may be laid up and reserved for use; but, I suppose, in respect to the custom of those times and countries, the word area or floor, is the more proper, both here and in several other places in scripture, and so doth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Arabick, by which Abu∣Walid explains the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Goren.

The next word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yekeb ours in the text render, the wine-press, but in the margin put, Or, wine-fat, as if they took the word in∣differently to signify either; and so it appears they did, in as much, as though most usually they render it where it occurs by the more or∣dinary signification of wine-press, yet do also elsewhere render it by fat, as Joel 2.24. and 3.13. and that signification Drusius looks on as most befitting this place, viz. that it should denote the fat into which the wine being pressed out is received, and so taken for the wine it self, that is put thereinto according to what is in the following words explained, The new wine shall fail her. But Kimchi looks on it as rather denoting here such a fat or vessel as the grapes are s put into, as look∣ing on a double use of it viz. of receiving the grapes brought to be eaten, or the wine pressed out of them to be drank; so that he in this expression looks on it as containing the grapes gathered for the use of eating, because in the other there is a distinct mention of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or liquor of them for drinking: but this I think is but a nicety and according to t him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tirosh it self is somtime put not only for the liquor after it is pressed out but for the grapes in which it is, and not yet pressed forth: the meaning will still be the same and so far extend it self that neither from the corn nor their grapes, their bread or wine or ought that the earth affords for nourishment (which may well be compre∣hended under these the cheif of them) they shall find what may suffice to satisfy them; which is expressed in the next word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo yireem, shall not feed them. The Chaldee Paraphrast for making the meaning plainer expresse••h what is uttered in an active Verb, by a Passive, and so changing the case of the Noun accordingly, instead of, the floor and wine-press shall not feed them, putting, From the floor and from the wine-press, (or wine-fat,) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall not be fed, or nourished, in which way the Syriack likewise follows him, and in like words, only for the last having 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they shall not be satisfied; but this neither alters the meaning nor gives us to suspect any different reading, but the Greek doth, who rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The floor and the wine-fat hath not known them, make it to be thought that they did read, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yireem in the Future Tense from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to feed, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yadaam in the Preterperfect from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yada to know. How easy a mistake it is between the two letters 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 r and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d, in the Hebrew it is manifest, they being so like in figure that in several both written and printed copies, it is hard to distinguish them; and perhaps he that wrote that copy which they used, meant it for an r though they took it for a d, and rendred it

as they did, looking on it as giving a good meaning, that they knew them not, i. e. did not yeild themselves to be known or found of them, as agreeing with what follows which they render and the wine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hath lied unto them. But what is here spoken, is evi∣dently spoken as of the future, what should be, not of what had been: and Tremellius censures their reading that it is, prorsus aliena, very strange and different from what it should be. Though therefore the printed Arabick follow it, we have no reason so to do. Not feed them. They were spoken to in the second Person, and singular Number in the foregoing verse, but here spoken of in the third Person; such change of Persons, though still the same, is not unusual, as neither the change of Num∣bers and Genders where a people are spoken of, as hath been v elsewhere observed.

And the new wine shall fail in her, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tirosh is usually taken to signify wine, and especially new wine, must; so that I know not why the Syriack should here render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meshcho oyl, where usually else∣where he renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chamro wine, ex∣cept he should think the word to signify in∣differently the liquor that is pressed as well out of the olive, as out of the grape, or be∣cause the three kinds of corn and wine and oyl are usually joined together, thought them to be here, so also, wine being under the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yekeb, the wine-press or wine fat, comprehended.

What is by ours rendred shall fail in her, being in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yecachesh bah, may be rendred literally, shall lye in her, or to her, and is so rendred as by the Greek, as we have seen as to the Verb, and by the printed Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 so by the vulgar Latin mentietur eis, by the Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and by others agreeably w mentietur in ea, or x isti; but then in the original and in all them is lying no other∣wise to be understood then for failing: as for the Hebrew, that use of it elsewhere is manifest as Habb. 3.17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cichesh maaseh zait, the work of the olive shall lie, as ours there have it in the margin, i. e. as in the text they put it, as here, shall fail, as the like use of the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cazab, of like signification to this, is also made, y Isai. 58.11. whose waters fail not, as ours in the text, but in the margin, lie or deceive not, and it is z observed also that mentiri, to lie, and men∣dax, lying, have the same use in the Latin tongue, viz. to import failing or not answering to hope or expectation. As for the thing signi∣fied viz. the failing of what they might ex∣pect from the new wine, and the other profits of the earth, may be a compared Haggai 1.6, 9. and c. 2.17. so that as to the sense it is well rendred by the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the wine shall not suffice them. The reason of that use of the Hebrew word which we have shewed R. Tanchum gives thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. The root of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cachnash is (or hath) the signification of lying, but is figu∣ratively used to signify 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 failing; be∣cause a lie, is a thing that faileth, having no foundation.

There is another exposition of the words mentioned, though not so much approved by him viz. that some would have the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yecachesh bah to import, that others should take the wine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as if it should, as it were, deny them and not acknowledge them, (by a notion like that of the LXX. on the former Verb.) This meaning Aben Ezra gives, and it is the same which the MS. Arab. hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the new wine shall deny them: so I render it because of what Aben Ezra and R. Tanchum say; otherwise it may be rendred shall be little profitable to them, or fail them, ac∣cording to what AbuWalid observes of the use of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Arabick to signify one in whom is lit∣tle good: so that the meaning according to him is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they shall be frustrated of it: well is it therefore by ours rendred, shall fail in her, or fail her, viz. either in quantity or quality, having not Gods blessing with it, or by reason of the enemy taking it away from them, or them from it, into captivity.

As for the Preposition with the affixe viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bah, i. e. as ours render it literally, In ea, in her, or as others, her, or, to her; it denotes or points out the same persons that the affixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 em in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yireem signifying, them, in the Plural Number and Masculine Gender did, and is therefore by many b ancient and more modern so rendred, which might make it seem probable that they so did read it here also, viz. Bam; especially because it is noted by the Masorites, that this is one of c two pla∣ces in which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bah written, is to be read or understood as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bam. R. Tanchum saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that it would regularly seem to require to be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bam, and so under∣stood

but adds his note, as d Kimchi also, That, when a nation or people is spoken to (or of) they sometimes put an affixe, (or Pronoun de∣noting the Person) in the e feminine Gender, as a∣greeing with the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Edah signifying the Congregation, sometimes in the Masculine as a∣greeing with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Am, people, and that, some∣times in the Singular Number, as all of them making one body, and sometimes in the f Plural, as consisting of several persons, and that they per∣mit, or use, to pass from one of these kinds to another 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in one continued speech 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 relying on it as well known in it, or taking it for granted, who is meant. Abarbinel thinks it put in the feminine Gender as agreeing to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zonah an harlot, to which he had compared Israel, g but the former rule may suffice. h Some think what is here threatned to refer to such scarcity as was among them about the time that Tiglath Pileser came up against them, (2 Kin. 15.29.) or afterwards i when Shalmaneser so did, who besieged Samaria three years and took it, and carried away Israel into Assyria, c. 17.5.6. viz. k about the time of their captivity.

v. 3. They shall not dwell in the Lords land; but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean things in Assyria.

They shall not dwell in the Lords land, but Ephraim shall return into Egypt &c. Here is a farther punishment of Israel for their Ido∣latrous courses and a farther reason, why they should not securely rejoice therein, viz. be∣cause they should for such wickedness not only be deprived of such good things of the good land of their abode, which they made occasions thereof to themselves, but even be cast out of that land it self, that they might no more in it have any such occasion: and that land is for aggravation of the punishment called, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Erets Jehovah, (or as the Jews read it, Adonai) the Lords land, The earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof, the world and they that dwell therein (Ps. 24.1.) all are his; yet as among all nations he had a people which he owned for his peculiar, viz. Israel, so also a land in which he placed them. Such peculiar privileges did he bestow on the one and the other, such peculiar blessings and favors and tokens of his continual l care over them, and regard to them, that they were de∣servedly called his above all others, and the Chaldee therefore not unfitly renders it the land 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Shecinah or Majesta∣tic presence of God, and the Arabick MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the land of the Lord of the worlds. This was that land which he sware to their Fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them (Deut. 30.20.) and did accordingly give it to them, that they might have the use and possession of it, yet still with a reserve of the propriety of it to himself, according to what he saith, The land shall not be sold for ever, for the land is mine, for ye are strangers and sojourners with me, Lev. 25.23. m And the land was given them by God, not by any right of their own acquired. For these, and the like reasons frequent in the Scripture, was the land of Canaan which the Israelites were in, called, above others, Gods land, to omit what n some add as a reason of its being so called because, Christ the Son of God was to be born in that land, though in it self material, yet perhaps not here had respect to so much as his taking it from o∣thers and giving it to them, with the reserve as we said, of the right thereof to himself as Lord or God of that land; as even those Idolaters acknowledged him, 2 Kings 17.26. Now to them as usufructuaries had he given this land, on that condition that they should continue to be his faithful people, faithfully to serve him, and duly observe his laws and ordinances; No longer than they should con∣tinue his obedient people, had they right to his land, given them. So it was declared to them, when they were cautioned that they should not commit such abominations as the former inhabitants of that land had done Levit. 18.26. that the land spue not you out also when ye defile it, as it spued out the na∣tions that were before you. This title the Lords land, Kimchi restrains to Jerusalem which in∣deed had the priviledge of being called the City of God; but Israel, the ten tribes, are here peculiarly spoken of, which dwelt not then at Jerusalem, nor had it in possession; and therefore much more reasonable, yea ne∣cessary is it to understand it of the whole land of Israel, as taken for the whole twelve tribes, the whole land of Canaan, which for the rea∣sons above mentioned and the like, was just∣ly called the Lords land. In this land it is threatned they should not continue long to dwell, and what harder thing could be threat∣ned to them? Might they not even cry out with Cain, accursed to be a fugitive and va∣gabond in the earth, My punishment is greater then I can bear, Behold thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth, and from thy face shall I be hid &c. For, to be cast

out of their own land must needs be a grie∣vous thing to any people, and they will scarce enjoy themselves well any where else, though in a place as much owned by God as their former: but to be cast out of the Lords land, to which such promises of his blessing were annexed, what is it less than to be cast out of his presence, the sense of his favor, and protection, exposed to all evils, yea than to be threatned with the loss of the heavenly Canaan of which this earthly was as a type and pledge? o How shall they if they might enjoy in a strange land the greatest plenty, (although this seems to imply the depriving of that also) rejoice for joy as other people, who were suffered to dwell in their own land, though but a mean one? The misery of this their condition is farther aggravated by the mention of those lands, whither being driven of the Lords, they shall go, and their condition there.

Two places are named, neither of which may seem probable of yeilding much occa∣sion of joy to them. The first is Egypt, the very mention of which out of the memory of that hard servitude, and grievous oppres∣sion that their forefathers there indured, might well be thought to be no way acceptable to them; much less seem a place that they should delight to go to: besides, it was a place that God had commanded that they should not return to, saying, ye shall no more return that way, Deut. 17.16. yet again threatned as a punishment on their disobedience, that he would bring them into Egypt by the way whereof he spake unto them, Thou shalt see it no more again, Deut. 28.68. They could not willingly forsaking the Lords land, go thither without sin and a breach of his command; and to be forced to go thither through fear or compulsion, not being suffered to dwell in the Lords land, the land that he had given them to dwell in, must needs argue them to be but in an ill condition, and be of ill con∣sequence, and end in ill to them. That they went thither of their own accord though ur∣ged by fear, through distrust of God, is ob∣jected to them as a folly and sin, above c. 7.11. this here, that they shall compelled to leave their own land, return thither, will ne∣cessarily shew that that punishment of old threatned in the law is now come upon them: and that so it is, will appear by comparing c. 7.16. and this c. v. 6. wherein is declared what shall there befall them.

This returning of theirs into Egypt, here spoken of, seems to be the going thither of se∣veral of them to avoid that destruction which was by the Assyrian brought on their Nation, when the rest were by him either slain or car∣ried captives from the Lords land into Assyria and other Countries under him where they were wandererers among the Nations, v. 17. and what by this their returning thither they gained, we may learn from the places cited out of the 7th c. and this, viz. to be derided by the Egyptians instead of finding succor, and to be gathered up to destruction and bu∣ried. This is all the occasion of joy that they shall there find, and the threatning of this may well curb their present exorbitant re∣joycing, what ever occasion they might seem to have of it. Of their thus returning into Egypt there is no particular mention in the history of the Bible. Of many of the Jews who fled thither for fear of the Chaldees af∣ter Jerusalem was taken we read 2 Kin. 25.26. &c. Jer. 43.7. but this seems peculiar∣ly spoken to Ephraim or Israel of the ten tribes; yet God having said of them that they i. e. many of them should so do, p we cannot doubt but they q did so. The same that is here said, is above also said c. 8.13. whither we may have recourse for illustrating these words.

The second place named is Assyria. We read above of their going to Assyria c. 5.13. c. 7.11. c. 8.9. but that going, in those pla∣ces mentioned, appears to be different from this here; for different ends and occasions: that was of their own accord that they might make friends of the Assyrians for help and succor against such evils as they suffered, and they are taxed for it as folly and rebellion a∣gainst God, but this such as was by compul∣sion, being by the Assyrians, as an enemy into whose hand God had delivered them for their sins and rebellions, carried away captives into slavery against their will and forced. The words therefore seem a manifest denouncing of their insuing captivity, the history of which we have 2 Kin. 17.6. which with what very ill circumstances it shall be at∣tended, is described by what is here said, that they shall eat unclean things there; a circum∣stance of very bad nature, implying that (than which really nothing can be thought worse) they who had long so obstinately run on in sinning against Gods law, should be delivered up to such a condition as that they should therein be even necessitated to live in a con∣stant transgressing of the law, if they will live at all: If they will eat for sustaining of life, they must eat unclean things, which by the law they could not do without manifest sin and breach of Gods command, however ne∣cessity might seem to excuse what they did in such an external rite: yet must it needs be grievous to them to be forced to do what they knew to be contrary to the law. It

could not but make them look on themselves as thrust from Gods r table and communion with him.

By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tame, rendred unclean things (or that which is unclsane, it being the Singular Number) we may understand things which however not unclean absolutely in them∣selves, yet were by the law made so to them, as many sorts of beasts and fowls, and such among those that it did permit to them, as yet by not being duly, according to the law, or∣dered as to the killing and dressing of them, were also made common and unclean as St. Peter calls such things Acts 10.14. and saith that he had ever abstained from eating them, & Daniel though under the necessity of captivi∣ty also, and at the disposal of others thought he s could not eat of, without defiling him∣self, and therefore, though to the putting himself to great hardship, resolved to abstain from, Dan. 1.8, &c. and in the history of the Maccabees (2 Macc. 6. &c.) old Eleazar chose rather to undergo the severest torments and death, than to submit through any con∣straint to eat: as likewise the seaven brethren and their mother in the next Chapter. It could not but be, the law for such distin∣ction of meats being then in force, a grievous thing to these in their captivity to be necessi∣tated to eat such things, and if they willing∣ly did, a token that they were no more a pe∣culiar people of God, but as profane as those with whom they did partake in so doing, and rejected by him. So is it threatned also as a punishment to the Jews Ezek. 4.13. that they should eat defiled bread among the Gentiles. This was one of the miseries of their captivity. "For among the Gentiles, saith Kimchi, they could not be able to eat their bread with purity and cleanness. Aben Ezra seems to make it an effect of t their willing breaking of the law in eating what was un∣clean or polluted by giving it to Idols, in their own country, the Lords land. And a commensurable punishment was it to their sin, the mentioning and threatning of which ought to have curbed that rejoicing and exult∣ing, in the 1. v. forbidden: Seeing ••e shall eat unclean things in Assyria 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 under the hand of hard Lords, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 How shall ye rejoice and exult? So A∣barbinel makes the inference. w Some, look on this as intimating, as well, their extreme poverty by which they should be forced to it, as a constraint from those that had power over them. The vulgar Latin renders here the Verbs in the Preter Tense, reversus est, hath returned, and comedit, hath eaten; but the x Expositors thereof usually interpret it as the Future. The LXX. also with the printed Arabick, which follows them, puts the first in the y Preter Tense but the last in the Fu∣ture. But sure as the Hebrew in both bears the Future signification, so seems it most con∣venient to render them, what is spoken con∣cerning what they should do after they were removed from dwelling in the Lords land, not what they had before done.

v. 4. They shall not offer wine-offerings to the Lord, neither shall they be pleasing unto him: their sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of mourners: all that eat thereof shall be polluted: for their bread for their soul shall not come into the house of the Lord.

They shall not offer wine-offerings to the Lord, neither shall they be pleasing unto him, t eir sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of mourners, &c. The plainest way for having both the connexion and meaning of these words seems to be, to take them as a declara∣tion of a farther adjunct or ill circumstance attending their expulsion out of the Lords land (their own country) in the preceding v. spoken of, namely, that they shall not then where they shall be, be in a capacity of having opportunity of offering any acceptable offer∣ing to the Lord, in offering of which, much of the outward part of their religion did then chiefly consist; and should be as it were quite cut off from z any expression of relation to him or any means of reconciliation with him, a all signs of grace; which certainly could not but be a great punishment and mi∣sery to them, as a manifest token of their be∣ing rejected by God, and estranged from him, and no more owned by him for his peo∣ple.

This meaning will be made plain from the words particularly considerd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo yissecu Lajhovah (or as the Jews and divers others abstaining from reading Jehovah, lado∣nai) yain. They shall not offer to the Lord wine, i. e. wine-offerings (as our later version for ex∣plications sake add, offerings, being not ex∣pressed in the Hebrew but necessarily under∣stood; the Geneva English having only wine,) the Chaldee as ours renders offerings of wine. The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yissecu, is of the Future Tense, and therefore properly by ours so rendred, u

as of what was then to come. A word it is of frequent use in the Scripture, and from the Notion that it hath, of b pouring out applyed to those wine offerings, which were com∣manded by the Lord to be offered with their sacrifices or poured on the altar with them: which offerings are therefore called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nesec, from the same Verb and by ours usually ren∣dred drink offering, we have both the Verb and the Noun joyned together Gen. 35.14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vayassec aleha nesec and he poured a drink offering thereon. And Exod. 30.10. and elsewhere. The word is used as well for such as are offered or poured out to c Idols, as to God, but the name of the Lord here added, determines it to such as were offered to him, according to his command, the rites and manner, and necessity of which the law in sundry places (as Num. 15.5, &c. and Num. 28.7, &c.) sheweth, and how they were suited to other offerings, and required neces∣sarily with them; so that to say they should not offer these, is as much as to say, what is above said c. 3.4. that they should be without sacrifice.

The next words likewise, neither shall they be pleasing unto him, well answer to the He∣brew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo yeerebu lo, in which the Verb is still of the Future Tense, as speaking of what was to come. But mean while it is left ambiguous in both, as likewise in the Greek and Vulgar Latin, who, or what, whe∣ther Persons or things, shall not be pleasing, neither being expressed, but left to be under∣stood. It is an easy way of construction to understand it, of the same persons who it is said shall not offer wine offerings; and so d some take it to be understood or at least e think it may be so; but perhaps the word will not be elsewhere found applied to persons, though to such things as belong unto them, as their meditation Psal. 104.34. their sacrifices and offerings Jer. 6.20. Malac. 3.4. And why may it not be said of the persons themselves being sweet or pleasing unto the Lord? But others, and those the most, think it understood of the things offered, viz. their wine offer∣ings, though there be not expressed the Noun in the Plural Number, but only wine in the Singular. And that there may not be left any scruple to the Reader, f some do join to this in their translations the next word which ours join with the following clause, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Zib∣chehem, their sacrifices, and then in the next clause g again understand or supply it or some∣thing equivalent. So the Geneva English, nei∣ther shall their sacrifices be pleasing unto the Lord, but they shall be as, &c. but because h the accent in the Hebrew after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Io to him, shews that word rather to belong to the fol∣lowing, others leaving it so, do here supply their i libamina or wine offerings, following therein the Chaldee Paraphrast, who supplies Their offerings shall not be accepted with well pleasing; and then proceeds, their sacrifices &c. It will be all one as to the matter whi∣ther we say They (with their wine offerings) shall not be pleasing or accepted, or, their offer∣ings shall not be pleasing unto the Lord. But then, it having been said, They shall not offer wine offerings, it must necessarily be under∣stood, k if they should offer them, they shall not be pleasing unto him.

But all scruple in this kind would be taken away if we shall take the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeerebu, as the Reverend Lud. de Dieu doth, in another signification which it hath, viz. of mingling, that so it might be rendred, neither shall they mingle to the Lord, viz. any such wine offer∣ing with their sacrifices; which will be but as a repeating of what is said in the former word. This way of rendring, he confirms in that from the notion of mingling, the same offerings which are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nesacim, li∣bamina, pourings out, are also called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mim∣sac, mingling, or mixture Is. 65.11. there by ours rendred, the drinke-offering. I know not what may be objected against his conjecture, only that he, for ought I finde, was the first that thought of it, and it hath not obteined a common consent or reception. The Syriac ver∣sion goes something differing from all that we have seen, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l neither shall they make sweet therewith their sacrifices, comeing nearest in meaning to the last mentioned, though otherwise distinguishing the words.

If they cannot offer drink offerings accepta∣bly, then certainly, no other oblations or sacri∣fices; and so he proceeds to shew, saying their Sacrifices shall be unto them as the Bread of Mour∣ner. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lechem which is looked on as properly signifying, Bread, yet is more generally taken for Food, or Meat, of any sort, and the flesh of sacrifices duely offered, is cal∣led the m Bread of the Lord. It is here said, that theirs, they being such, and where, and in such condition, as they were, out of the Lords land, should not or could not be such to them, but as polluted bread of mourners which was not fit or lawful to be brought into the house of the Lord. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Calechem onim, as the as the bread of mourners, or mournings, for the wore Onim, is capable of being rendred either way, and the matter will be all one, it signify∣ing n

how unfit it was to be offered unto the Lord; all that belonged to mourners, or in the time and place of their mourning for the dead, being legally unclean to them, so that all that eat of such their meat should be polluted. So saith R. Tanchum that by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lechem Onim, is meant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the meat of sorrows, the word Onim being the plural of what is sayd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 26.15. concerning the confession of him that brought his third yeares Tithes, I have not eaten thereof in my mourning, &c. and what he saies, all that eat thereof shall be polluted, is by him explained, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because that mourners (for the dead) for the most part they and their vessels are polluted, either by touching of the dead, or being covered under the same roofe with him, or by touching some that touched him. So those that are busied about the dead, and mourne for them, and look af∣ter their burying, are said to be defiled, Levit. 21.1. &c. and how far pollution from the dead extended it selfe to all that came into the same tent or were in it, &c. is declared Num. 19.14, 15, 16. So that it could not be but that their bread, or food, was legally unclean, and all that eat thereof for the time then in the Law prescribed, (viz. seven daies) pol∣luted. And here they had nothing to offer for sacrifice but what was continually such, and therefore not fit to come for an offering into the house of the Lord.

Abarbinel observes, that his saying, their Sa∣crifices (shall be) unto them as the bread of mour∣ners, doth not import that they shall have sa∣crifices in their captivity, but that instead of the sacrifices which they formerly had, they shall now have only bread of mourners. And so the meaning of these words and the preced∣ing, according to him is; after that they shall goe into captivity, they shall not make (or of∣fer) wine-offerings, neither shall the o Mincha or oblation of Judah and Jerusalem be sweet unto him, as in ancient daies and former years when they were there. Their sacrifices shall be as the bread of mourners, to them; that is to say, in place of those sacrifices which they had in Jerusalem, there is (or shall be) to them the bread of mourners which cannot be eaten with cleannesse, but all that eat thereof shall be pol∣luted. It is that meaning of the words which we before made out from others; but with this difference that he applies to Judah and Je∣rusalem, what we think is to be applied more properly, to the ten Tribes.

Besides that signification which we have seen the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Onim to have, of mourners, or mournings, it hath also another, which is the notion of force, and so violence or oppression. And in that would some have it here taken. So R. So∣lomo Jarchi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 like bread of rapine, (or robbery) that cometh, (or is gotten) by force and violence; and so the MS. Arab. Version hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meat of violence, which, as to shew the illegali∣ty of their sacrifices, would come much to one pass. The Lord hating 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gazel, Robbery for a burnt offering, (Isai. 61.8.) as well as any other thing otherwise polluted. But the most take the other signification, and we may well follow them in it.

The following Expression, for their bread for their Soul shall not come into the house of the Lord, hath some difficulty in it, and is diversly tran∣slated, and expounded. That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lachmam Lenapsham, doth literally sound as ours render i••, their bread for their Soul, is no doubt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nephesh properly signifying a Soul. But it is also used for a dead Body or Car∣case, when the Soul is departed from it, as plainly Levit. 21.1. &c. Numb. 6.6. Hagg. 2.13. and elswhere: and in that sense, p some here taking it, render pro mortuo ipsorum for their dead, (which q others think very inconvenient) or r panis de cadavere i.e. ad cadaver pertinens, such Bread as belonged to a dead body, such as was eaten at Funerals, such being necessarily un∣cleane and so not fit or lawful to be offered unto God in his house. Others take it in its more proper signification of Soule or Person, yet so also differ, some taking it for such Bread, i. e. s such oblations, which they offered t for making atonement or expiation for their Souls; signifying that they neither should have oppor∣tunity of presenting such in the house of the Lord, neither by reason of the uncleanness of all that they had, had any which, if they had had opportunity, was fit thither to come or should be acceptable to God.

Others understand by Bread for their Soule, such as is for preserving the Soule, or sustain∣ing and keeping them alive, and so the mean∣ing will be their Bread, (and what is compre∣hended under that name) shall be for v their eating, but shall not come into the house of the Lord, or be fit to be offered to him. So Abarbinel, it is as much as to say, that all their Bread shall be for their Soule, (i. e. their selves) but shall not come into the house of the Lord to be offered to him, which is perhaps as good a mean∣ing as any and may well agree to the LXX.

and the printed Arab. the Latin translation of which expresly hath, panes enim corum pro ipsis sunt, non ingredientur domum Domini; and so Grotius takes it to mean, Cibus ipsorum ipsis erit, &c. Their meat shall be to themselves, it shall only serve for their own use, they cannot send any of it to the Temple, which they neglected to do when they might have done it; now it shall be too far off from them, and shall hereafter, be quite taken from them. Or that last clause we may understand that it should not be admitted into the house of the Lord, from them being in that state of Legal pollution as they should then necessarily be in. x Others understanding that bread for their Souls in like manner, expound it, Though they should offer the bread which is for their own suste∣nance, it should not be accepted.

By what hath been said, is made out a plain meaning of the words, taken as we said, for a description of such ill consequences and ill cir∣cumstances as should attend their expulsi∣on from their own country called the Lords land, and going into Egypt and Assyria and there forced to eat unclean things, viz. that they should there be cut off from any capacity of performing such outward services as the law then required, to God, and so be without any visible symbols or signs of relation to him, and without hope, at least those outward means then prescribed, for expiating of their sins and making atonement for them, and of being reconciled to God. And there are two causes suggested evidently by the words, by which they should be incapacitated so to do. First because they should b•• out of the Lords land, and far removed from his temple, to which the performances of such services was then so far tied, that it was not lawful for them to offer them elsewhere, nor should they, if they did, be accepted, but it would be rather a transgression to them. 2ly. In respect to the condition which they should be in in that place, viz. even under a necessity of legal pollution, both they and all that they had legally un∣clean; so that neither they should be fit to offer, nor the things that they had fit to be offered for sacrifices to the Lord, if the place had been fit for them to have offered in, they being in a perpetual state of mourning and anxiety, whereas, those that might acceptably performe such services, ought to have performed them with joy and chearfulness as in the cited place, Deut. 12.7. & 12. and c. 26.14. appears. y Some add a third reason, viz. Their poverty or want which should be such, as they should not have what to offer. Which though we may easily assent to, as a necessary consequent on that state of captivity which they should be in, yet I think is not the import of the words. Contrary to this, seems that of Jerome, who thinks by the words, that they should not offer a drink offering to the Lord, and that their Bread should be to their own selves, to be intimated that they should indulge themselves to z luxury and glutting themselves, and not look after that which should be offered to the Lord. But I see not, how this may well agree with the words if looked on as a description of the misery of the future condition they should be in, though it might be fitted to such other exposition of the words as makes it a declaration of their present condition.

For there are others who do not looke on them as describing the condition they should be in, after their Expulsion from the Lords land, but as declaring that which they did be∣ing yet in it, and these also go different waies. Some, so as to describe the unprofitableness of those services if they should now performe them; others so as to shew their wrong per∣forming of them while they pretended to per∣forme them. The first of these Kimchi takes, whose Exposition is to this purpose 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 why do, (or should) they now bring drink offerings into the house of the Lord? for they shall not be plea∣sant to him, seeing they transgressed his comman∣dements and his laws. Their sacrifices which they bring into my presence shall be imputed to them as the bread of mourners which is polluted, seeing they are polluted by the dead. All that eat of the bread of mourners are polluted, and so their sacri∣fices polluted. For their bread for their Soule, the offering which they bring for their Soule, i. e. a for the expiation of their Soule, shall not come into the house of the Lord; for there shall be no profit in it, neither shall it expiate for them, seeing they pre∣sumptuously sinne, and when they bring an offering, do not turne from their sinne. The connexion and scope of the words according to this interpre∣tation of his seemes to be, that God having threatned them with Expulsion out of his land and captivity, it will be in vain for them to think to avert the determined judgment by any sacrifices, they having been and continuing to be, so wicked as they were, and persisting in those Idolatrous and Rebellious courses for which the decree was irrevocably gone forth against them. According to this way therefore b some would have the first Verb translated not by the future Tense, but by the imperative Mood, ne libent Dom••no, let them not offer wine-offerings to the Lord, for their sacrifices shall not be pleasing unto him.

They that take the other way render it in the preterperfect Tense. So the LXXII. render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. and so the printed Arab. they have not poured out

wine unto the Lord neither have they been pleasing to him. So Capito, c Non libaverunt Domino vi∣num, neque oblectamento fuerunt, so making that which our first way made a consequent on their Expulsion from the Lords land, to be a cause of it. So he last mentioned, The cause why they shall returne into Egypt, and why they shall eat polluted bread in Egypt; because although they poured out the fourth part of an Hin (of wine) according to the law, yet they powred it not out unto the Lord, although they did it in the Temple.

For in this they were not pleasing to the Lord. Why so? because their sacrifices were as the bread of mourners, of which they that eat are esteemed to be polluted, and so they that par∣take of their sacrifices are polluted. Wine a symbol of chearfulness, being powred on the sacrifice, is a signe that the heart of those who partake of the holy service is powred out in love towards God, with which affection they were not touched, to wit, being sorrowful and unwilling to all things of the law. He esteemes that polluted bread, and a defiled sacrifice which is performed in vain, and without the study or desire of Gods glory. So in Malachi the Priests offered polluted bread. Whatsoever therefore is designed in Hypocrisy and not from the heart, is polluted. For God is truth, and loveth and accepteth them only who worship him in spirit and truth. For their bread, &c. He denies that their Corban and offering which was brought for expiation sake should be admitted into the house of the Lord;

i. e. they should not obtain pardon for their sinnes. I have rendred his words at large because I think the book is not very common.

Calvin seems in much to follow this, or ra∣ther to joyn these two last waies, and to pre∣fer them before the first; while he looks on the words as spoken of the d time betwixt these threats and their captivity (in which they were frequent in their offerings and sa∣crifices) to shew that all they did was in vain, as not done in due manner, nor with right hearts, and therefore not at all acceptable to the Lord, nor profitable to themselves. His mean∣ing I suppose Zanchi summes up, while he saith that some will have this v. to be under∣stood not of the punishment of their sin, but of the sin it self, and that he meetes with the Hy∣pocrisy of the Israelites who bragged of their sacrifices, saying they do but lose their labour in what they do, because their sacrifices are not offered to God, neither are accepted by him, whereas both they and their offerings are unclean; And so libabunt shall offer to be un∣derstood for libant do offer, as much as if he said, they do not offer their sacrifices to God, but to Idols, and therefore they are not pleasing or ac∣ceptable to God. But though these waies, as to the matter, be true and give a good mean∣ing, and we may well look on their wrong offerings formerly to be a cause that they shall be henceforth deprived of all capacity or op∣portunity of offering acceptable offerings to the Lord: yet the first keeps an evener tenor and series of connexion without interruption, while it takes these words as spoken of the same time to which we have seen the preced∣ing to be referred, and shall find also the fol∣lowing to be, and that in the same respect, viz. their departure out of the Lords land into cap∣tivity, and the ill condition they shall be then in, so that they shall not have occasion to rejoyce for joy as other people, as v. 1. he shews they had not nor should have.

v. 5. What will ye do in the solemn day, and in the day of the feast of the Lord?

This v. is a farther Explication of the sad condition which the Israelites should be brought to in their expulsion from the Lords land, by putting to them, spoken to in the second person the more to move them with the apprehension of it, what in the former was said of them, and so hath a plain connexion with it according to the first and plainest exposition that we gave of it. If it shall be so that you shall not be in a capacity or have opportunity of performing ordinary service to God in of∣fering ordinary daily sacrifices to him, which must needs be a cause of continual sorrow to you, how will ye do in the solemn festivals ap∣pointed in the law for you to e rejoice in, as the Passover, &c. how shall ye have opportu∣nity of offering in them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the extraordina∣ry offerings for that end required in them (as Abarbinel, here taking this way of exposition, sums them up) offerings, auctaries, peace-offer∣ings of the feast, and f peace-offerings of joy? Surely these they could not in a strange coun∣try, and in a state of captivity, have capacity or opportunity of offering and rejoicing over them, and their being cut off from them must needs be an addition of grief to them, when they called to minde with what joy they former∣ly celebrated them. For though it may be said that before, even in their own land, they could not duely perform such services after that they had separated themselves from the tribe of Judah, and had not free recourse to Jerusalem and the Temple, where they were according to the law to be performed, yet more than pro∣bably, g they did still retain as many feasts as

were in the law prescribed, and kept them with as great mirth as they that rightly kept them, as in the worship of their Calves at Dan and Bethel and their Baals they would make as much shew of devotion as they that served the true God. But then they were a free peo∣ple, and had things in their own power and enjoyed plenty; but now being under the power of others, so that they could not do, but what their masters would permit and ap∣prove, and brought to great straites and pe∣nury, they could not be capable, or have oppor∣tunity of convening so to do, or to provide what was necessary for celebrating with joy those good daies; so that it is the same which was threatned above c. 2.11. I will cause all her mirth to cease, her feast daies, her new moons and her Sabbaths, and h all her solemn feasts. For according to this way we take the names of So∣lemn day (which some take more particularly to denote the feast i of the Passover) and of the feast of the Lord (which they think to comprehend the other feasts and k in which they seemed to have a nearer and more familiar access to God,) in their proper, known and usual signi∣fication.

But there are others which will not have the words understood of any solemn days, or feasts that they should keep, but of the day of that destruction wherein God should take ven∣geance on them by the enemie gathered against them, which should be called the Lords solemn day and feast, which should be l as acceptable to him as those feast daies wherein fat and ac∣ceptable sacrifices were (according to his in∣stitution) offered to him. This way takes Je∣rome, this m Cyril, saying that that time is cal∣led the proper feast of the Lord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in which Israel shall be called to account and punished for their Sins against him. This also several of the Jewish Doctors as R. Solomo who by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yom moed, rendred, the solemn day, understands 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the day of the appointed time for the enemie to be gathered together against you, and by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chag Jehovah the feast of the Lord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the sacrifice of slaughter which he hath for you (or among you). R. Abraham Ez∣ra also, though his words be obscure, being only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the feast of the Lord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in opposition to your own sacrifices. R. Da∣vid Kimchi more perspicuously saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the day of destruction is called the solemn day according to what is said Lam. 2.7. They have made (viz. the destroy∣ers or enemies) a noyse in the house of the Lord as in a solemn feast day; and the day of destructi∣on is a solemn day and feast of the Lord, because God, blessed for ever, called the enemies to come together n to the house of the Lord to destroy it, and to shed the blood of the Children of Israel, like the blood of sacrifices.

This way is also by o some more moderne Expositors chosen and preferred. p One saith of it that it is expositio germana, a proper and ge∣nuin Exposition, making the sense to be, ye who will not now repent, while ye have time, and the Lord with patience expects you, what will ye do when sudden calamitie, and una∣voidable judgement shall come upon you? This time (saith q one) of revenge, is called the solemn day and feast of the Lord, because therein majestas potentiaque ipsius declaratur, his ma∣jesty and power is set forth, as it was, according to his institution, by devout people, set forth on their feast dayes by the performance of divers rites and ceremonies. But however this be backed by so great authority, the former Exposition seems the easier and plainer, and according to it, the next verse follows as a confirmation of what hath been said, shewing that to such a condi∣tion they shall certainly be brought, and can∣not by any means which they shall use, escape it, and that in vain they shall hope to be freed from it. So saith he.

v. 6. For lo, they are gone, because of de∣struction: Egypt shall gather them up, Memphis shall bury them: the plea∣sant places for their silver, nettles shall possess them; thorns shall be in their tabernacles.

For lo they are gone because of destruction, (or spoil as the Margin) Egypt shall gather them up, Memphis shall bury them, &c.] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci hinneh halecu For behold they are gone, viz. a∣way out of their own country, the Lords land, wherein they might have had opportunity of serving God and offering him acceptable sa∣crifices. This we here understand by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 halecu they are gone, rather than other∣wise r what that word may signifie i. e. are dead; in language well known, and as it is by some here taken; though to that this their going a∣way, did tend as the following words shew.

They are gone, the verb is in the Preter tense, as of what was already done, though not yet done; according to the prophets usual way of speaking which we often meet with, to shew the suddainness and certainty of the ac∣complishment of what is foretold.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Misshod s because of destruction (in the Margin ours put, spoil, as in several other

places it renders it.) And so the MS. Arab. renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for lo they are gone by reason of spoil (or from the place of spoiling; the Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They are gone, in a or for, spoil. Kimchi restrains the word here to that destruction which is by fa∣mine, so saith he, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shod here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the same that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Raab, that is, Famine, and then so taking it, he gives a different meaning of the words from that which we have menti∣oned, taking the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Halecu not as spoken of what was then to come, but of what had been, and so to have respect to the pre∣ceding words, thus; They went to Egypt by reason of the grievousness of Famine, viz. hereto∣fore when Famine opressed them, and found re∣leif; but now in the day of desolation what will they do? or to this purpose, they have already fled out of their county for famine and sword, and how shall they stand, or whither shall they flee for refuge in the day of that utter destruction and desolation which shall come upon them? whither will they flee for help? If into Egypt, they shall now find it there otherwise. This seems his meaning; where∣in I know not why we should agree with him in either, but rather take the Noun in a more general signification of destruction, and the Verb as we said in the Future signification, as a pre∣diction of what was not yet come, but should certainly and shortly be, and so what is said will be a prediction that when, (as shortly) the Assyrians should invade their land, and spoil and lay wast all things and bring destru∣ction on them, several of the Israelites to e∣scape that which at home would certainly be∣fal them, and did befal those that stayed there, some of them being slain, the rest carried cap∣tives, should (and doubtless accordingly did, though perhaps no express relation of it be given in the history of the Scriptures) flee in∣to Egypt hoping there to find refuge and safe∣ty, and probably promising to themselves that after their staying there for a time, they might, the Enemie being departed, return again to their own land and habitation. But how con∣trary to their expectation things should be to them in Egypt, and that destruction which they thought by flying thither to escape, should there overtake them, and how vain their hopes of returning home were, the next words shew, Egypt shall gather them, &c.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tecabbetsem shall gather them. Of the signification and use of this word something hath been said on c. 8.10. and that, either good or bad to men may be thereby denoted, according to the end for which they are said to be gathered. Here it is manifestly a threat of evil, b ad poenam, say some, it shall gather them for punishment to them, c others perhaps (more conveniently though Tarnovius thinks otherwise) ad sepulturam, to burial, that so the following words Moph shall bury them, may be the d explication of what is meant by this. e In that sense it is used Jer. 8.2. They shall not be gathered nor buried, and Ezek. 29.5. They shalt not be brought together, nor gathered. Or Egypt shall gather, i. e. f be as a grave to them in which they shall be shut up and detained or else (which will be to the same purpose) may be understood, to death or destruction, accord∣ing to that notion in which g 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kobeda (answering to this root in Hebrew, signifies to die or be dead. So that the meaning will be, in Egypt whither they flee for safety, they h shall die or be seised on by death, and there be buried and never return into their own land. For Moph is taken for a chief city or Metropolis of Egypt, the same that elsewhere is called i Noph, as k Isaiah 10.13. Jer. 2.16. Ezek. 30.13. &c. In other languages Mem∣phis; the Chaldee and Syriac here call it Maphis. Whither it were, the place now l called Cairo, as some think, or near it, it is not to the purpose nicely to enquire; sufficient is it to observe that by one chief City named, where it shall be so as he saith with them, m it may be un∣derstood what shall be the issue of their going into Egypt, and what they shall find in any part thereof, though to that place probably most of them betook themselves.

The story of Israel's going thither, and so fareing there, being not particularly (as we said) recorded in the Scripture, is the occasion I suppose, that some of the Jewish Expositors apply what is here said to some of the Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem, to whom and to what they then did, and what befel them, the words would in themselves, well agree. So R. Solomo understands their going away from spoil or destruction, of their flight by reason of the multitude of spoilers that came upon them with Nebuchadnezzar; and Abarbinel, Egypts gathering of them, of the gathering together of a great multitude of them at Alexandria, who were there destroyed by the Romans, or thinks Moph to be the name of some place 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the West, whither diverse of the Jews fled both after the destruction of the first and se∣cond Temples. But manifestly what is here spoken concerns peculiarly those of the ten

Tribes, and doubtless was fulfilled in them; and to such of them as fled into Egypt when the Assyrians came on the land, and against Samaria, so thinking to escape those judge∣ments by God threatned against them, is by the words all hope cut off, of again returning into their own country and repossessing of it, and least they should hope that though they in their own persons did not, yet their Children and posterity might, thither return, and inha∣bit their cities and houses as before, these hopes are also prevented and cut off by the following words, shewing that not only the present persons, but even their habitations themselves should be destroyed and laid wast, so that they should no more be fit to be inha∣bited.

The pleasant places for their Silver nettles shall possess them. So ours in the Text; but in the Margin, their silver shall be desired, the nettle, &c. or else the desire, &c. The word rendred in the one reading, pleasant places, in the other, shall be desired, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Machmad; the Root of which, viz. the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chamad, signifi∣eth to desire, which in both is had respect to, pleasant places being all one with desireable pla∣ces; but the form of the Noun being as it is with addition of the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 m before the root, gives occasion of this variety of rendrings, and others such like as we find in other tran∣slations, though all haveing respect to the same notion, and all tending to the same scope. It may be taken simply for desire, as elsewhere it is, and that understood for what is desireable or desired as 1 Kings 20.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Col ma••hmad Eineca all the desire of thine eyes: which others there rend∣der, whatsoever is pleasant in thine eyes, and in the Margin, desireable; and Ezek. 24.16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the desire of thine eyes, and so v. 21. and 25. and to omit other places, v 16. of this c. the desires of the womb, as ours have in the Margin, but in the text, the beloved fruit of their womb. In this signification the Syriac literally renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the desire of their silver, which the Latin transtator renders ex∣quisitum argentum eorum, and in this way the vulgar Latin seems to have taken it, rendring it desiderabile argentum eorum, which as Rivet observes, more in scripturis usurpato, in a way usual in the Scriptures, is but a plainer expo∣sition of desiderium argenti eorum, as the In∣terlineary hath it, the desire of their Silver, or as it might be more literally rendered, if it will make a convenient sense, argento eorum, to (or for) their silver by reason of the letter or Prepo∣sition n 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 le, prefixed in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lecaspam and so the meaning may be, the desire of their silver i. e. those things which they so desired as by their Silver to procure them to them∣selves, or through desire of them laid out their mony for purchasing them, or adorning them, o as goodly houses, furniture, lands or any like costly things, p even their Silver Images shall be so utterly spoiled by their Enemies, that in the place where they formerly enjoyed them, there shall be found nettles and thorns. In like sense Abarbinel seems to have taken those words, expounding them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their desire, their wish and their Silver. Nor doth Castalio seem to go otherwise, rendring them eorum pecuniae elegan∣tiam, adding his note, possessionum elegantissi∣mas, the most elegant of their possessions; these all shall be, &c. By all these is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Machmad taken simply for the desire, and seems no o∣therwise taken in that other rendring, which ours put in the Margin, viz. Their silver shall be desired. For to make this out, the literal construction of the words will be, with a ne∣cessary supply (there shall be) desire to (or of) their silver, viz. (as Pisc.) by their enemies, who shall deprive them thereof, so that there shall be nothing there left to them, but instead thereof, nettles and thorns; or as others, by themselves, q Desiderium erit ipsis Israelitis ad suum argentum, The Israelites themselves shall have desire to (or after) their Silver which they left in their country, when they fled (or were carried away,) they being, where they were, poor and miserable. In this way the first words make a clause by themselves, which in the o∣ther way make but one with the following.

But besides that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mach∣mad is so used simply for desire, or what is de∣sired or desireable, according to its form, which we mentioned, it may include together the notion of the place, and signifie; the place of de∣sire, pleasant desireable place, which is desired for something that r is in it: and so do ours in the Text render it, the pleasant places for their silver; and so divers others of good authority. So the MS. Arab. version expresly 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The place of the desire of their Silver, and so manifestly the Chaldee takes it, rendering it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The house of the desire, or, as the s Latin renders it, in domo desiderabili, in the desirable house of their Silver, and so Kimchi expounds it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The houses of their desire (or desirable houses) which were the treasures, (or repositories of their Silver,) and much the

same R. Solomo, the houses of the desire of the treasures, (or which were the treasuries) of their silver. In these and the like, its plain the Noun is looked an as nomen locale a noun importing place, and so the meaning of it may be as in these Jews named, such places or houses as they were wont to keep store of mony in, or fill with Silver plate and vessels, or t hide their treasures, or otherwise richly to adorne and v overlay with Silver.

As for these houses, he saith, nettles (or the nettle) shall inherit them; for so according to our reading in the Text, w quod attinet, i. e. as for the pleasant and desireable places, must be understood, that so the affixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Em, them, in the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yirashem may answer thereto, to shew that they are the things that shall be inherited. But then the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Machmad, being the singular number must be taken x collectively so as to import more; to wit, all such places, that so the affixe which is of the plural number may be applied to it: otherwise there will be an in∣congruity, which to avoid, some altogether y omit that affixe, rendring, as Pagnin, domos desiderabiles argenti sui urtica haereditatio jure ac∣cipiet, and the Geneva English, The nettles shall possess the pleasant places of their Silver. But others having more regard to it, avoid the incongruity by referring the affixe, not to that noun denoting the place or thing but to the persons spoken off, haereditario jure posside∣bit eos, shall by right of inheritance possess them; the men, but by them understanding, their houses and desireable places, by a z Metonymy. Or thus the meaning may be made out, In the desireable (or pleasant) places, for their Sil∣ver, the nettle shall inherit them, i. e. succeed them, as the same word is in the like mean∣ing, and with the like affixe, referring to the persons, elsewhere also used, as Deut. 2.13. and the Children of Esau 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yirashum, i. e. literally, inherited them (as ours have in the Margin) that is, as they put in the Text, succeeded them. And again there v. 21. the Lord destroyed them before them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vayirashum, and they succeeded them. And in∣deed this meaning of the words seemes most convenient, in all the waies of Expounding the former words which we have seen, except that of theirs which putting the word by which they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Machmad, in the accusative case, quite omit the affixe, which whether it ought to be omitted may be con∣sidered. And for the supplying of in the Chal∣dee will direct, who renders this verb with its affixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall dwell in them (though he put it in the last place, but we supply it at the beginning. This may be observed for regu∣lating the construction of the words, though the meaning according to all be much the same, viz. to express an utter desolation and laying wast of such places as are spoken of, the pleasant places for their Silver and their Ta∣bernacles, by such things as are evident tokens thereof; namely the growing of nettles and thornes there, which do not use to grow in in∣habited houses, but in rubbish and neglected places, as also the like expression is elsewhere to the same purpose used, as Isa. 32.13. Ʋpon the land of my people shall come up thornes and briars, yea upon all the houses of joy in the joyful City; because the places shall be forsaken, &c. and again c. 34.13. And thornes shall come up in her Palaces, nettles and brambles in the fortresses. Where for nettles and brambles are the same words that are here rendred nettles and thornes, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimosh and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Choach the first of which (I think) is no where else found but in this place, and that, except we joyn with it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimmeshonim, Prov. 24.31. where it is rendred, thornes, there being joyn∣ed with it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Charullim, which signifies nettles. There also the growing of them be∣ing put to signify a place or a field that is neg∣lected.

As to the signification of the words here both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimosh and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Choach, R Tanchum saith of them that they are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a kinde of thornes and that Kimosh by some is said to be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a nettle. Kimchi likewise, that they are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sorts of thornes; and so perhaps will it be better to rest in a general notion of such prickly weeds and plants ( a the names probably being common to more) which grow in uncultivated places, than nicely to ap∣ply them to such particulars as are usually known in these parts to us: nor need it trouble us if we find Interpreters to differ in the spe∣cifying of them, while they tend to the same scope in nameing such b the growth of which in places where houses or tents stood, is a token that those houses are now destroyed and laid wast, and those tents removed, though perhaps they be not the very same with those that grew in those parts.

The words however, are looked upon ge∣nerally as denoting some kind of prickly weeds (as nettles, burres, thistles or the like) or plants as some sort of thornes or briars; but the Chaldee renders them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Karsullin and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chatulin which R. Solomo and Kim

chi say are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sorts of wild beasts. And likewise the desolation of houses or places is elsewhere expressed by the inhabiting of se∣veral kinds of such beasts or birds there, as well as by the growing of weeds or thornes, as in the forecited Isai. 34.11.13, 14, 15. But what sort of beasts they are, they do not tell us, nor shall we easily find. The last word Chatulin is usually taken for cats, the first 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(which is like it in sound only with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ts. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 S.) I find not for the name of a beast, but for a c fowl with long legs, which standeth in the water and prey∣eth upon Fish. Among such fowls as are nam∣ed in the forecited Isai. 34.11. are such as are by ours rendred the Cormorant and the Bit∣tern, but we can have no certainty of it; and I know not whither he might not put them for names of plants: the first of them is usu∣ally rendred by translators as so, urticae nettles, and whither the latter from its scratching might not have the same name with a Cat, I know not, neither do I know why the Sy∣riac should render the first 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Strangers, (or perhaps, strange things) The latter he ren∣ders as others 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thornes. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 beholehem, properly signifying in their tents, the Chaldee renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in their palaces; the ancient manner of dwelling having been in tents, that name may well enough be attributed to any dwelling places or houses, however built, and however mag∣nificent. d Some observe by the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yirash, to be noted the continuance of the de∣solation threatned them. It is not said that they shall only spring up in those places, but shall haereditario jure possidere, possess them at their inheritance; so that there shall be no hope to the former inhabitants of recovering them again.

These ways which we have seen, though in some things differing among themselves, yet none of them differ so farre as the Greek and printed Arabick following it, do, in respect both of their punctation or distin∣ction of the words, and in the acception of some of them. They thus render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Therefore behold they shall go from the calamity of Egypt, and Memphis shall receive them, and Machmas shall bury them, their Sil∣ver, destruction shall inherit it, and thornes in their Tabernacles. In which besides their dif∣ferent pointing as we said, it is observable that the word Machmad which is translated pleasant places or desire, or what is desired, or desirable, as Jerome observes all others to have rendred desiderabile, i. e. e 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they make to be the proper name of a Ci∣ty or place, which they took to be in Egypt; and he thinks it plain, falsos eos esse similitu∣dine literarum, that they were deceived by the likeness of f the letters. Drusius thinks it to have been corrupted from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. (perhaps be∣cause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is elsewhere the name of a place, though not in Egypt, as 1 Sam. 13.2. and Isai. 10.28.) Tremellius censures them for so tak∣ing it, as guilty of a gross mistake, saying nimium crassus est error quod ex nomine communi, proprium nomen loci faciunt. Again that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rendred a nettle, they render by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 de∣struction; which why they should do, the same Tremellius saith that no man can easily divine. But for this perhaps it may be said that for that which was the sign or consequent, they put the thing signified, or the cause, viz. The growing of Nettles being a sign or conse∣quent of desolation or destruction, they in∣stead of what signified them, put the name of that which they were a token of, to wit, de∣struction.

According to these also, the scope of the words is still the same, viz. A threat of destru∣ction or desolation to Israel, and their coun∣try, which evil day least they should put, as hitherto it appears they had done, farr from them, and look upon the judgments by him, or other of Gods Prophets denounced, as things threatned to affright them, but either not at all to come, at least not yet awhile, so that they need not for fear thereof to make any great hast to break of their evil courses, but might still se∣curely enjoy themselves in them, to awaken them from this their security, he assures them in the next words that the time wherein they shall be made good on them is at hand, as sure∣ly, and that suddenly, to come as if already be∣gun, and therefore speaks of it as already come, in the next v.

v. 7. The daies of visitation are come, The daies of recompense are come, Israel shall know it: the prophet is a fool, the spiritual man is mad, for the multitude of thine iniquity, and the great hatred.

v. 7. The daies of visitation are come, the daies of recompence are come, Israel shall know it, &c. g The Lord is long-suffering and of great mercy, giveing to sinful people time to re∣pent, yet by no means clearing the guilty, who refusing to make right use of that time do not therein turn to him by repentance. For such

he hath a time determined wherein to take account of them, and to punish them for all their iniquity. This time he assures the rebel∣lious Israelites, who refusing to hearken to the voice of his Prophets calling on them by re∣pentance to prevent it put it far from them, to be now instant and at hand, and that it should certainly seize on them, and therefore (as we said) speaks of it as already come, and he expresseth it under the name of the daies of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Happekudah visitation, and of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hashillum recompence, both which notions of visiting and recompence, are indiffe∣rently used for good and for evil. Of the first in the notion of Gods taking notice or being mindful of any for good, and for doing them good which he had refrained before from do∣ing to them, examples we have as in other places, so Gen. 20.10. where it is said, The Lord visited Sarah, and Gen. 5.25. when Jo∣seph saith to his brethren, God will surely visit you: and on the contrary, it is to take notice of for evil, to call to an account or punish for such Sins as he had hitherto forborne, as ve∣ry frequently elsewhere, so before in this Prophecy, c. 1.4. where ours in the Text render it avenge, for explications sake, but in the Margin, visit, and c. 2.13. and 8.13. And that the second word is used in both waies, to omit other examples, that one place in Job. 34.11. shews. The work of a man 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yeshallem lo, shall he render, (or recompence) unto him, and cause every man to finde according to his way, viz. If his work be good, he shall recompence him with good, if evil, with evil: both are called recompence. Here it is manifest they both import evil, and what the effect of this visitation and re∣compence for evil shall be, the following words declare.

Israel shall know it. The last word it, is supplied, the Original having only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yedeu Israel, Israel shall know, and there ours with others make a stop, that what is said may be referred to what precedes, and what follows may be a new sentence. In these times, Israel shall know. What? that now is in good earnest come upon them, what being before threatened to them by the Prophets that it should come, they would not know, believe, nor take notice of, so as to seek to prevent it by forsaking those evil waies which it was said should bring it up∣on them. It shall now, being verified up∣on them, teach them by sad experience to know both the justice and veracity of God, and h that his messages sent to them by his Prophets were not vain threats, nor they false messengers. To this purpose are these words expounded by those who here so make the distinction as to refer them to the precedent, and to make one clause with them, separated from the following; Which some think most agreeable to the Hebrew i, by reason of the distinctive article in that place where it is, but others (not disap∣proved by some of these) without regard to that, do joyn them with the following so as that they should denote that which it is said, they should know, and not what went be∣fore.

k Others think them so placed as to have re∣spect to both, and to be, therefore, though once expressed, yet twice repeated as to im∣port, Israel shall know that the times of visitati∣on, the times of recompence are come, and again Israel shall know, the Prophet is (or) that the prophet is, or was, a fool, &c. There will be no great difference, as to the sense, which ever of these waies of distinction be taken, as we shall see by looking into the meaning of the following words.

Among those that referre them to, and joyne them with the following words, is Jero∣me, or the vulgar Latin which hath, l scitote Israel stultum prophetam, &c. know ye O Is∣rael, the foolish Prophet, or the Prophet to be a fool, &c: But in him is to be observed in the first place that he changeth the Verbe from the Future of the third person Plural signifying, they shall know, into the second person of the Imperative Mood, scitote, know ye; for no other reason I suppose, than that he thought it to add some emphasis if the person were spoken to, and bid to do that which is said, they will, or shall do. And with him, as to that viz. that it should be understood as a com∣mand to them, agrees the MS. Arab. but with∣out change of the Person, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 let therefore Israel know that, &c. I think therefore that there is no reason why m some should think that the Author of that vulgar Latin did read otherwise than is now commonly read, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vedeu, and know ye, instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yedeu, they shall know. For then he must have put in Et and, to answer to the conjunction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve, which he doth not, but only thinking that which he thought was spoken by way of command, would, as we said, be more Emphatically expressed in the second Person, so put it, viz. scitote, know ye O Israel, and perhaps the rather because the affixe in the following words, thy iniquity is in the second person. But others who thus joyn the word with the following, commonly ren∣der

it more closely to the original, scient, Is∣rael shall know; namely that which follows, The prophet is a fool, &c.

But in the giving the meaning of that we shall find again difference of expositions, some takeing by the Prophet and spiritual man, or the man of the spirit, as ours in the Margin put it, literally answering to the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ish harruach, to be meant false Prophets, others to be meant the true Pro∣phets. Of those who take it in the first way (which perhaps is the plainest and by most followed) are among the Jews, the Author of the MS. Arab. version, who renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hannabi, the Prophet by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he that attributes to himself prophecy, or pretends to be a prophet; and Kimchi who explains it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lying or false Prophets. Yet do not these agree in the whole construction of the words, the MS. Arab. thus rendring them, let Israel therefore know 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that the fool who pretends to be a prophet, is a man that is possessed with, or acted by an evil spirit, where he either comprehends the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ruach Spirit, under the word n 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by which he renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meshuggah which ours tran∣slate mad, or else it is omitted by him or the Scribe. But Kimchi expounds it more clearly, Then shall Israel know and confess, and say, con∣cerning their false Prophets which deceived them, and said to them peace, peace, then, I say, shall they say of them, The prophet is a fool, the man of the spirit, is mad. And he is by many of the Christian Expositors in this followed, mak∣ing this the meaning, that Israel, when those evils shall come upon them, should know that those whom they took to be Prophets, and who pretended to the Spirit, and they thought to be acted by the spirit, and there∣fore believed them promising them security in their evil courses, and bidding them not to fear the coming of those evils which God by his true prophets threatned, were indeed nothing less, but on the contrary, fooles and mad men, mere fanatical impostors, walking in the spirit and falshood as he speaks Mich. 2.11.

In the same sense Abarbinel takes it, There∣fore, by the coming of those times, necessarily shall all Israel know that the prophet or dreamer of dreams who made them to be secure, was a fool and a mad man, for behold visitation and recom∣pence shall come, &c. Meanwhile between those that so farr agree, there is some difference in rendring & explaining these words which ours render, the spiritual man, or man of spirit; o (which is all one with a Prophet) which in the Hebrew is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ish harruach. For, in as much as, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ruach in the Hebrew sig∣nifies both Spirit, and Winde some here render it, looking on it as spoken of one that had not the spirit of God in him, but a false prophet, p Virum venti a man of winde, or, windy man, so Jun. and Trem. q viros ventosos esse to be windy men, such as had nothing of truth and re∣ality in them, but were vainly puffed up with their own conceit. But though the word may well so signify, and it be true that the false Prophets to whom they had hitherto heark∣ened were such, yet r others think it better to take it in that signification of a man of the spirit, as where it is understood of a true spi∣rit, such as were true Prophets, to wit by way of concession, because they pretended to the spirit of God, and were by the people looked on as inspired with it, and not with that evil spirit which really set them on worke; though in whichsoever of these re∣spects he be looked on as so called, the s scope will be much one, and the Epithet of Foole and Mad, be that which by the things that have succeeded contrary to his prediction, will be manifested really to belong to him, and he shall no more be thought, what before he was thought, to be a prophet or spiritual man.

According to this way the following words may be looked on as containing a reason of what hath been said, should be, viz. for the multitude of their iniquity, &c. and by some are looked on as so, in respect to the first words of the v. to wit, that these times of visitation and recompence should come up∣on them for these two causes, viz. the multi∣tude of their iniquity, and the great hatred, so Jun. Trem. t By others, more in respect to the immediatly foregoing, viz. the prophet is a fool, the spiritual man is mad: namely as a reason why God should suffer such prophets to be amongst them and to delude them which can∣not certainly be looked on but as a very great judgement on, and punishment of, them, that it was, for the multitude of their iniquity and the great hatred. So the Arab. MS. expresseth the connexion by supplying 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and that be∣cause of the multitude of thy Sinnes, and the mul∣titude of hatred. But it will so have influence on both, viz. on the visitation and recompence spoken of, as being occasioned or hastned by

their false prophets deceiving them; and to this way also may the words make accord∣ing to another rendring which some give, the prophet is a foole, &c. for the multitude of thine iniquity there is also much hatred, or making a distinction, for the multitude of thine iniquity; therefore is there much hatred, viz. u of God to them. But they are not by all looked on as a reason of the preceding, but by some as ra∣ther an effect or product of the false perswa∣sions of those foolish prophets and mad men of the spirit, so Grotius seemes to take them who so couples them with those preceding, as to shew the pretended inspiration of those impostors to have been used only for the mul∣tiplying of their iniquity and augmenting ha∣tred against the good.

These; by the prophet, all understood false prophets, and that the Syriack translator did so also, appears by his adding an epither more than what is in the Hebrew; his translation of the words being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which sound, Israel shall know the mad prophet is a foole, (or the foole is a mad pro∣phet) the man that is invested with, or, on whom is, the spirit of madness, for the multitude of thine iniquity thy wantonness is increased, for so I think it better rendred than it is by the La∣tin translation, Agnoscet Israel demens prophe∣tam stultum, &c. mad Israel shall know the foolish prophet, &c. and as we render it, it will much agree with the MS. Arab. But others as we said understand it of true prophets.

But before we come to give their meaning it may be convenient by reason of the Syriack rendring of the last word, by wantonness, or lasciviousness (for so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shericutho in that Language usually signifies) to speak something of the signification of the He∣brew word, which will be of equal concern∣ment to both waies. The word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mashtemah by most, as by ours, rendred hatred, or, aversation. The ancient Latin indeed ren∣ders it amentia madness. The circumstances of the places where that theme occurres do ne∣cessarily seeme to require the notion of ha∣tred, aversation, bearing a grudge, anger or en∣mity or the like, as Gen. 27.41. where it is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vayishtom, Esau eth Jaacob. and Esau hated Jacob, and the like in other places where it occurres; where∣fore w some that they may make amentia mad∣ness, agree with it, strive to shew that to have in it such a notion as may import such a mad∣ness or passion in the minde as is raised by sense of, or griefe for some injury received, and makes a man refuse to be reconciled to him that hath done it. In this sense it beares well enough to say that one is mad against such a man. Abuwalid and other Hebrew Grammarians expound it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and x 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Enmity, and the MS. Arab. by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ill will hatred; why then the Syriack should render it Lasciviousness I know not what rea∣son can be given.

But then it being taken in its proper sig∣nification of hatred or the like, what hatred shall be meant; what or of whome? or to∣ward whome? whether of their hatred a∣mong themselves one of another, or of their hatred to God or his Prophets, or good men? or of Gods hating them? for as to this, Ex∣positors are not of one minde. Intestine ha∣tred one to another, say some; Jun. and Trem. looke on it as so unquestionable that they put it into the text of their translation, ren∣dring for the greatness of thine iniquity y Et amplum intestinum odium, and the great in∣testine hatred which is among you, adding for explication sake in their note, ex quibus tam multi reges pauco tempore, in Israele extite∣runt, by which it came to pass that in a little space of time, there were so many Kings in Israel. Others understand it of their hatred with God or z against God, and his word and a true prophets or b good men: others of c Gods hatred to them for the multitude of their iniquities, or with which God hated their deeds, as R. Solomo, and Kimchi whose words are, for the multitude of their iniquity was this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d that thou wentest aside, af∣ter false prophets and forsakest the true, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 there∣fore is the hatred of God great against you. And of this will it be almost necessary to un∣derstand it according to his Exposition, and the rendring which he suggests, viz. There∣fore is there also much hatred; he seemes to make the reason of their being given up to be deluded by false Prophets to be the great∣ness of their iniquity, because thereby Gods hatred towards them was made great, but ac∣cording to the rendring by ours given and the others which we have seene, and the Expositions of them given, it will be indif∣ferent which of the kindes of hatred which have been mentioned, be taken.

But against the last seeme some excepti∣ons taken as if the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mashte∣mah, rendred by ours and others hatred, by

the vulgar Latin amentia, madness, as we have seen, denoted such a passion as it is not fit to attribute to God. So e Petr. à Fig. ne∣que placet ut tale odium aut dementia ad Deum referatur, cum R. David & Solomone, sed potius ad ipsos Israelitas qui Deum & prophetas ejus odio implacabili prosequeban∣tur, It pleaseth me not that such hatred or mad∣ness should be referred to God, as R. David Kim∣chi and R. Solomo Jarchi referre it, but rather to the Israelites themselves who bare implacable hatred to God and his Prophets, But this scru∣ple, though it be attributed to God himself, will be taken away, if by Gods great hatred, we understand not any such passion in him, but the great hatefulness of their wickedness to him, or their many Sinnes such as f were an hate to him, as he hated, or whereby they justly deserved his hatred, as the learned Mr. Lively observes, odium or hatred in other Languages also to be used, to signify, that which one hateth, or which is hateful to him, and for illustration he puts that of Prov. 11.1. A false balance is abomination to the Lord. So that the sense will be, that God suffered it to be so with them as it was, because of the mul∣titude of their iniquity and the great wick∣edness, by which they provoked his ha∣tred; or because by reason of the multitude of their iniquities they were become very hateful to God, therefore he both brought on them those severe times of visitation, and suffered them also to be deluded by those false prophets who made them negligent in preventing them, which now they shall too late know and perceive.

The other way of understanding by the pro∣phet and spiritual man, mentioned, the true prophets, viz. as if that were the thing ob∣jected to them, that when God sent unto them any true Prophet, or man speaking as he was moved by his Spirit, they said of him that he was a foole and mad, will require something to be supplied after Is∣rael shall know, for connexion of the words, as that they did ill in saying the prophet is a foole, &c. or they shall know whether the prophet were a foole, &c. So St. Jerome who Ex∣pounds it, now, O Israel, know thy words, who calleast the prophet who spake true things to thee, and prophesied by the holy spirit, a foole and a mad man; &c. know that not my Prophets, but thou, art mad through the multitude of thine ini∣quities, in which thou hast long raged, indea∣vouring to tread under foot my words. Aben Ezra among the Jewes takes this way, and thus expounds the words making them a reason why the times of visitation and re∣compence should come upon them; Because God will repay unto you what ye said of the Lord: prophet, that he was a foole and of the man in whome was the spirit of God, that he was mad, and by hatred in the last place he under∣stands, that hatred g which was in every one of their hearts. I suppose he meanes, against God and his word, and prophets or their message. R. Tanchum also thus explains it, that then, viz. when those times are come, they shall know the measure of (or what they did in) their deriding the Prophets and calling them by those names (of fooles and mad men,) as in what we read, wherefore came this mad fellow to thee, 2 King. 9.11. They said also con∣cerning Jeremiah; for every madman and that maketh himself a Prophet, Jer. 29.26. How farre he approves of this way he tells not. For without shewing which he preferres, he gives another explication, according to the former way, thus, It is by others said that the meaning is, that they shall then know, that those whome they believed to have been endued with prophecy as the false prophets which promised to them good, and soothed them up with perswasi∣ons that they should continue in their condition, were indeed fooles and madmen. He addes also, a third Explication given by some, viz. that this which is said is a threat that there should arise a certain person who should pretend to pro∣phecy, without any truth, but in a way contra∣ry to reason and telling of things in which there is no reality. But of this Exposition he saith that it is, h farre from what the scope of the place directs to. And I thinke much the like may be said of what R. Solomo Jarchi saith looking on it so as to import that some of their true prophets should turn fooles as Ananiah the sone of Azur, who at the begin∣ing was a true prophet. But I finde not any that follows him in this.

The Chaldee Paraphrast seemeth to have respect to both the former waies, viz. that of those who understand by the prophet, false pro∣phets, and of them that understand true pro∣phets, while he renders the whole thus, The daies of visitation are come, the daies of recom∣pence for sinnes. They of the house of Israel shall know that i the true prophets prophecied to them (viz. right things) (or as others render, that the prophets prophesied to them truth,) and (or but) the false prophets, made them mad, k that they might multiply (or because they have multiplied) thine iniquities and strengthned thy Sinnes, or according to another rendering, because their iniquities have been multiplied, and thy sinnes

strengthened, or been great. That which others put, as if the meaning were, They shall know that Israel was to himself a foolish prophet and a madman who despised the true prophets, and pro∣mised to himself prosperity, seemes but tak∣en out of St. Jeroms.

From all these which we have reckoned up, the Greek and the printed Arabick follow∣ing them, are yet different, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. The daies of vengeance are come, the daies of recompence to thee are come, and Israel shall be l afflicted (or ill treated, as a (or the) prophet that is besides himselfe, a man m transported by the spirit; Be∣cause of the multitude of thine iniquities, thy mad∣ness is multiplied. Of which words so rendred what sense the Greek fathers give, we shall not here enquire, but only take notice of the translation and especially that what is in the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yedeu shall know, they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall be afflicted, or ill treated. Hence some conjecture that they read other∣wise than we now read, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the like, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ra, Evil: St. Jerome so thinks and lookes on it as a mistake of theirs in taking the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 r, and so do n o∣thers thinke. But though it be a very easy conjecture, yet I think there is no necessity why we should think them so to have read. For if the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yada, seemed antient∣ly to them to have that signification which some more moderne attribute to it, not on∣ly of knowing, but of o punishing, chastising, ex∣cision and the like, then would they give the sense well enough, by they shall know, under∣standing they shall be made to know by the evils which shall be inflicted on them, which is agreeable to the scope of the place, wherein such great evils are threatned to them. It is observable also how for making out their meaning they p add after it the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(Ar. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) as, which is not in the Hebrew but withal leave out some other word which may answer to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Evil, foole; wherefore Drusius seemes to think that at first it might be written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which would so signify, and answer to the Hebrew, however it came to be by the Scribe changed into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the word of similitude, as if it were to denote q that they and their prophet, such as is described, should both perish alike in the same manner, or together; then, how they something change the order which others follow in the con∣struction of the words, though retaining the same signification of them, and that they make a stop after, man of the spirit, which several others also as we have seen do; and then that in the last place, they render Mash∣temah, hatred, by, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 madness, as we have seen the ancient Latin to do: and what we have said on that occasion of the word mad∣ness, and how some would bring it to be neere in signification with hatred, may be in respect to this also taken notice of, as being con∣firmed by the use of that word where St. Paul saith of himselfe how he had been 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 exceedingly mad against those that beleived in Christ, Act. 26.11. and by what the Psalmist saith of his ene∣mies that they were mad against him, Ps. 102.8. yet the Arab. rendering it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies frantickness, seemes to have taken it for another sort of madness, viz. such as is from a fanatick spirit acting them and so is by Cyril taken for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 false pretending to prophecy.

After all this heaped together by reason of the different opinions of Expositors, the plainest meaning and agreeable to our tran∣slation, will be, that though the Israelites made light of those threats by Gods prophets de∣nounced against them for bringing them to speedy repentance, by which they might prevent the execution thereof, and the pro∣phets were slighted and contemned by them, yet certainly the daies were at hand which should make them sensible, that not a word of God should want its effect, and that his prophets were true prophets, but their false prophets to which they, contemning them, hearkened, were indeed the fooles and mad∣men. And that this should come to pass for the multitude of their iniquity whereby they shewed themselves to hate God, and made themselves odious and hateful to him. s A learned man gives his note on this verse that it is, especially that latter part, locus ob∣scuritate insignis.

v. 8. The watchman of Ephraim was with my God: but the prophet is a snare of a fowler in all his waies, and hatred in the house of his God.

The watchman of Ephraim (was) with my God: (but) the prophet is a snare, &c. This v. seemes to contain a farther declaration of what was said of the condition of the pro∣phet r

spoken of in the preceding. The con∣nexion will better appear when we shall have looked into the meaning of the words. The language of it in the Hebrew is very concise, there being not one Verb in the whole verse for regulating the construction of the words one with another expressed, but left to be supplied or understood, which caus∣eth obscurity and gives occasion of different Expositions; and therefore of Interpreters not a few usher in their Exposition with a preface warning of the great obscuri∣ty of it, which hath caused great diversities among them. Concerning the meaning of the words singly there is no great difference; and there is no doubt that they have in the Hebrew, all that are of them, that significa∣tion which is in our translation given them, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsopheh, a Watch-man, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im Elohai with my God, in the first clause in which is the greatest difference; and so the following. But concerning the application of them to the person, or thing spoken of, in a fit notion, and the construction of them, one with another, and what is to be sup∣plied for joyning them together, and the like circumstances, there is such variety of opi∣nions, as hath produced as many different Expositions, as one can well think the words should be capable of. I know not how we shall avoid tediousness in looking into some of them, that we may see the grounds on which they go, and so judge which it will be most reason to joyn with.

The first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsopheh, from the roote, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsaphah, to look about, to observe, to spie, t being taken as a noun, is usually rendred a watch-man, denoting such a one as is set in some convenient place to look a∣bout and spie what is of concerne to warne the people of; as in time of War, of the approach of the enemy, or the like, but is transferred also to signify such who are over others, and ought to oversee them and have in∣spection of them and their affairs, and to warn them and direct them, and is there∣fore attributed to Prophets, as Ezek. 3.17. and 33.7. and by like reason may it be given to others also who are in such place as requires them to have oversight and care of people to warne them and direct them to what is good, and keep them from evil, as Princes and Magistrates; and so Je∣rome here taking it, understands by the watch∣man here spoken of, Jeroboam, who instead of keeping them in obedience to God, with∣drew them from him by his wiles, and set up the hateful Idol of the Calfe in Bethel, which signifies the house of God, and he thinks to be here meant. And there be some, not only more antient Latin Expositors usually cited, but more v moderne also which approve of it; yet is it by others, and I think justly, ex∣cepted against, and it is therefore evidently understood by others in respect to the pro∣phetical office; but by these again different∣ly, in respect to those circumstances above mentioned, as will appear by a view of them, as first and (without regard to order of time) of that which our last translation gives, which hath (that we may compare the others with it) The watchman of Ephraim was with my God, the prophet is a snare of a fowler in all his waies and hatred in (or against, as the Margin hath it,) the house of his God. Where is to be ob∣served that taking Tsopheh for the Nominative, and Ephraim for the Genitive governed of it, in the first clause, (for the last words we shall leave in the last place to be compar∣ed with others and examined) they sup∣ply or add for making the construction, the Verbe, was, as speaking of what was past, so that the meaning of the words in connexion with the following would be, that the pro∣phet whome God sent to them (as Hosea him∣selfe, or any other formerly sent and by them rejected) was with God, w a true prophet of his and did his business, delivered his mes∣sage, and sought to bring them to him, that he might prevent those Evils which their sinns would bring on them by working timely repentance in them, but those fool∣ish prophets which they now had, who sooth∣ed them up in their wicked courses by pro∣mising them prosperity, were as a snare of a fowler to them, &c. And for shewing the opposition between them, they supply the particle but, which also is not in the Hebrew. Or thus, x The prophets which heretofore there were among them, were with God, on his side, and sincerely delivered his word, but the prophets that they now imbrace, are o∣therwise, viz. a snare, &c. If instead of was there be put is, the sense will be much the same, affirming only that of the present time, which the others referre to what was for∣merly, supposing that there is now a pro∣phet with them who is such as we said.

2^ly Others instead of was, supplying y should be, read, The watchman of Ephraim should be with my God, but the prophet is the snare of a fowler, &c. This a former English transla∣tion usually called the Geneva Bible, hath, and in the Margin addes this note, The pro∣phets duty is to bring men to God, and not to be a snare to pull them from God, so making the

words to be a distinction between a true prophet and a false, that they might know what sort of Prophets they were which they now followed. 3^ly. Calvin supplying the same, yet adding before it also which, makes again a little difference, The watchman of E∣phraim which should be with my God, to wit, their prophet, is a snare, &c. In which way the watchman will not be understood of a true prophet, as in the former, but of a false one who only pretended to be a prophet, or whome they took for such. 4^th Tremellius gives two others; a first The Watchman of Ephraim is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im Elohai, z against my God, using the same way of construction, and supply∣ing, is, but rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not, with, but, a∣gainst, as he saith it is elsewhere used, a as for instance, oft in Levit. 26. It is so used also, Ex. 17.8. then came Amalek and fought 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im with, i. e. against Israel; and Deut. 8.7. ye have been rebellious 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im with, i. e. as ours there render, against the Lord. And the second, not much different, to this purpose. He that pretends to the degree of a watch∣man and Prophet in Gods name among the Israelites, is rather as a fowler with his net intangling them and setting them against God and his house and worship. This falls in al∣most with that of Calvin mentioned.

The Reverend Diodati, though following the same construction, and giving a like ren∣dring, The watch-mam of Ephraim is with my God, yet gives a far different meaning, Ex∣pounding is with my God, by, is dead, or, by God taken to himself. The prophet, (i. e. the false prophets that are at present with them) is the snare of a fowler over all his waies, &c. In all these the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsopheh is taken as a Nown (signifying a watch-man) and the Nominative case, and then Ephraim as the Genitive case, governed of it, and so also are they in another way by b some learned men taken, who do not supply the Verb is or was, as these do between them and the following words, with my God, but thus joyn them together, The watch-man of E∣phraim with my God, understanding something before them, and taking them to sound, Quod ad eum attinet qui speculator Ephraim est cum Deo meo, hoc est, fideliter & pie suo of∣ficio fungitur. Quod inquam ad prophetam attinet, verum scilicet & Spiritu Dei praedi∣tum, &c. As for what concernes him who is the watchman of Ephraim with my God, i. e. who faithfully and pionsly performes his duty, for what, I say, concernes the prophet, to wit, the true prophet who is indued with the spirit of God, in all his waies snares are set to intan∣gle him, by the wicked contemners of Gods word. So was Jeremy dealt withal, Jer. 18.22. and agreeable is what is said Isai. 29.21. they lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate. In which Exposition, by the way, we may ob∣serve, that though it agree with the former in rendring, the watch-man of Ephraim (as we said) yet it differs from them all, not only in that which he supplies as understood but in the distinguishing the words also, in that he makes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nabi the prophet, to be the same with the watchman, and to be un∣derstood of a true prophet; whereas the others for the most part understand it of a false pro∣phet; however some of them, take by the watch man, to be meant a true prophet, o∣thers a false and only pretended prophet. With which falls in also that of Drusius, propheta speculans Ephraimum cum Deo, if any prophet joyned with my God, do his office of a watch-man, they lay snares for him, &c. And the same is the result of another by him men∣tioned, Speculatur Ephraim cum Deo meo? Is Ephraim, i. e. any of Ephraim, as a watch∣man or prophet with my God? if so, they lay every where snares for him. And this way prevents an objection to which the former seem liable. For against all those who as we said, make Tsopheh the watch-man, to be the Nomi∣native case, and Ephraim the Genitive go∣verned of it, and to sound, of Ephraim, may be made an objection from the nicety of a Grammar rule, according to which if Tsopheh did so govern the Now Ephraim, it should be written with a different Vowel, in He∣brew, viz. Tsere as they call it, and not with Segol, as now it is, the first of which is a long Vowel, the second a short, though both sounding e. And this however a small mat∣ter and by those whome we have yet men∣tioned, not thought worth taking notice of, yet may seem to have given occasion to o∣thers of taking such wayes which by this may be avoided, and that again with no lit∣tle variety.

Some supply such a Verb as may make Tsopheh the watch-man to be the Accusative case governed of it, and Ephraim the Nomi∣native governing it, or some equivalent con∣struction, as Ephraim delegit hath chosen, or con∣stituit, hath set up to himselfe a Watchman with God; but that prophet is, &c. This way take several of the Jewes; so R. Solomo, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They set up to themselves their prophets which draw them aside to their Idols. But then the word prophet fol∣lowing, he understands of the true prophet for whome they laid snares. So also Aben Ezra, that Ephraim who accounted (as in the foregoing v.) Gods prophet a foole and mad∣man, c

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he makes of him∣selfe a watch-man, (viz. a prophet who should see what is to come) but this false prophet, is a snare of a fowler, &c. So agreeing with the former in the first words but otherwise un∣derstanding the prophet, viz. of the false pro∣phet which the•• set up to themselves, so agree∣ably Kimchi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim hath set up to himselfe a watch-man with his God, (or as a MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 my God) and he is a false prophet who uttereth his prophecy in the name of his God (or again as the MS. hath it, of my God.) That prophet is to Ephra∣im in all his waies, as a snare of a fowler which taketh birds; so are Ephraim taken by the words of their prophets. Equivalent to this ex∣pression, hath set up to himselfe, is that other by which Abarbinel expresseth it, as well as he doth use it also it selfe, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 understanding the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l, before Ephraim d There is to Ephra∣im a watchman with his God, i. e. Ephraim hath a watchman. He also otherwise interprets it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath made a watch∣man with God, viz. To tell what God will do with them, and that is his false prophet, and that prophet is or hath been a snare of a fowler in all the waies of Ephraim, and hatred in the house of his God. e Some that follow this way of construction, think better to supply, pu∣tabat se habere, Ephraim thought that he had a watchman and a prophet sent from God, and he it is that insnared them by making them se∣cure, and to persist in their wicked waies and stirred up the hatred of God against his house.

Others yet take another way, yet so as to make both the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsopheh watch∣man, and, Ephraim, the Nominative case, Ephraim is a watchman with God. To this may be referred the version of the LXXII. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the printed Arab. following him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Syri∣ac also, all sounding Ephraim is a watchman with my God. And so also may the vulgar La∣tin, speculator Ephraim cum Deo meo, there be∣ing nothing to shew that Ephraim is in it to be taken in the Genitive case, though in the Doway Translation so rendred of Ephraim, and by others so understood. Then follows in that way, instead of, The prophet is a snare of a fowler, in the Greek and printed Arab. a crooked snare; in the Syriac 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of of∣fence, in the Latine ruinae, of ruine, (all re∣specting more the matter then the literal signification) upon all his waies. To these Jun. and Trem. go much contrary, making Ephra∣im the Accusative case governed of Tsopheh, looking on it not as a Nown, but as a Par∣ticiple, which in the Hebrew hath the sig∣nification and force in construction of the present Tense of the Verb, and thus render and f explain, Speculatur Ephraim conjun∣ctum Deo meo, &c. He i. e. the spiritual man (the false prophet in the former v.) watcheth Ephraim that is joyned to my God, (i. e. such of the Ephraimites as yet cleave to God that he may seduce them) there is in all the waies of this prophet as the snare of a fowler, intestine hatred in the house of his God, (or as Piscator) as for the false Prophet he is as the snare of a fowl∣er in all his waies, i. e. the waies of those of Ephra∣im, that cleave to God, and adversatio, i. e. ad∣versans, one that sheweth crosseness or enmi∣ty: though Junius seemes rather to under∣stand, that they were stirrers up of hatred to them among themselves, by which they might as by snares intrap them, and do them mis∣chief under shew of religion. This rendring of theirs is by g some censured as too much wasted.

To these preceding may we refer also the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim watcheth (or performeth the office of a watchman) with my God; He that pretendeth to prophecy is as a snare cast over all his wayes; hatred in the house of his Lord. He seems to take Tzopheh as h a Participle rather then a Nown (viz. speculans or speculatorem agens,) though as to the sense it is still the same as speculator est, is a watch∣man. i And so a late learned man thinks it may conveniently be taken, for avoyding the scruple from the Vowel of the word, which we mentioned, saying it may be thus rendred, speculatur Ephraimus apud Deum meum, Epraim watcheth, (or spieth, or is as a watchman or spie) with my God, then ex∣pounding it, Ephraim will not seeme quite to have fallen from God, but makes a shew of ad∣hering still to my God, but solummodo spe∣culatur apud ipsum, doth only spie (or observe) with him, or what is with him) lookes what may be profitable to himselfe (from him) whence comes to pass what follows, that every prophet of his is a snare of a fowler in all his waies, viz. his own waies or else Gods waies; that so the sense may be That Ephraim while he seemes to be willing to adhere to God, doth but yet play the spie, apud eum, with or towards or in what concernes him, and the prophet while he seemes as if he would persist in the ways of God, and while he would seeme to delight in the house of his

God, is, mera adversatio, mere resistance or hatred in it. He adds likewise another way of construction, which would make the word to found, There is a watchman, O Ephraim with my God. So that they should follow on what is said in the foregoing v. that the Pro∣phet is a foole and the spiritual man mad, thus, but with my God, O Ephraim, there is a true watchman which doth well perceive thy hatred, and the madness of thy prophets; but he prefers the first of these two waies. But his Expo∣sition of them in that way is different from what those, with whome we look on him as agreeing for the manner of construction, are by others thought to mean. Of the ordinary Latin. Ruffinus seemes to make the import to be, that Ephraim would make him∣selfe to know as much as the Prophet by God sent, and they would put it to the ex∣periment, whither should come to pass the evil which the Prophet threatned, or the good which they promised themselves; and that the following words were by them spo∣ken by way of vilefying Gods Prophet, viz. that he was but a snare, &c.

The meaning of the Greek, Ephraim is a watchman with my God, is by k some of the Greek Fathers thought to be, that Ephraim was so instructed by God in the knowledge of his Laws that he should have been as a watchman, a guide and director, to the rest of Israel, and other Nations; but he, on the contrary, by his wickedness became as a snare to them all. l Others think this mean∣ing to be implyed in it, that they had as many Prophets as they had Gods with or besides the true God, and his true Prophets, which prophets of their own were as a snare, &c. The words so rendred I think may sound that Ephraim not content with what God di∣rected him to by his true watchman or, pro∣phet would be together a watchman with God, to himself, and have prophets of his own whom he would follow. But thus he was a prophet to himself, and had such of his own setting up as were a snare in all his waies, &c. Which falls in with that other above mentioned, Ephraim hath chosen, or set up, to himself a watchman with my God.

The Chaldee paraphrast seemes likewise to have taken 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tzopheh as a participle, while he taking the liberty of a paraphrast thus giveth the sense 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. They of the house of Israel, prospicientes or prospiciunt, look about that (or how) the worship of Idols may be established to them, they lay snares for their Prophets over (or in) all their waies, they multiply snares in the house of the Sanctuary of their God.

Which of these interpretations Grotius took notice of, or of what others, I know not, but his censure is general, durae sunt omnes hujus loci expositiones, all the expositions of this place are hard, and he offers therefore one which he thinks easier. To wit, that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Im, with, might be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Am the people of my God, that so the sense should be, The watchman of Ephraim which was the people of God, i. e. the Prophet, to wit, he that saith himself to be such, is become a snare for ruine in all his waies, through hatred against the house of his God, viz. the Temple of Jerusalem for those false Prophets laid snares in all the waies for such good men as would go up to the Temple, see c. 6.9. Thus that learned man; but what he calls easier, seemes more harsh and forced than any of the rest, while it offers violence to the reading in the original, without the warrant either of any cop••e thereof, or any other translation that ever did so read it. So that we may better content our selves with any Exposition that makes any tolerable mean∣ing than adventure to make so bold with the Text.

I shall add one more way which seemes to me to have not much of harshness in it, viz. That of R, Tanchum, who only understand∣ing the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 b, signifying, in, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l, to, as be prefixed to the nown Ephraim, as some others of them whom we have seen do, and which is no unusual thing in that language, and reading it, as he thinks well to agree with the series of the words with an m inter∣rogation, makes this the meaning, as if the prophet should say, Is there in (or to) Ephra∣im (i. e. hath Ephraim) awatchman or true pro∣phet, with God? Behold their prophets do in∣snare men by their deceit and there is n malice and strife between them, in their places of wor∣ship. That saith he, which is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The snare of a fowler is in all his waies, hatred in the house of his God.

These, and such like different waies are taken in the expounding this verse, so many, that it is hard to rank them in any good order, and I must therefore crave the read∣ers pardon, if I seeme not methodically e∣nough to have done it. Yet in all this which hath been said, respect may seeme chiefly to have been had, to the first part of it, so that it will be almost necessary to make some re∣flection on the latter words, though how they are by the most joyned with the former, hath been already seen in the citeing of their Ex∣positions.

The words in the Original are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nabi pach yakush al col deracau, mastemah be∣beit elohau, which word for word sound, A,

(or the) prophet the snare of a fowler over (or in) all his waies, hatred in the house of his God. In all which there being not a Verb expres∣sed, as neither in the foregoing, there must of necessity some be understood for regu∣lating the meaning that shall be given, and according to that meaning placed in the order of the words. The word prophet, is, as we have seen, by some joyned in appositi∣on with the word watchman, foregoing, and so makes one clause with the former words, by others joyned with the following so as to make, as it were a new clause with them. It is also by some taken for a true prophet, by others for a false, and by both is the Verb is supplied after it, though in differing order: If it be taken for a true prophet, then by supplying the Verb, is, after the word snare, it will thus run, a snare of a fowler is in all his waies, i. e. there is a snare as of a fowler laid by them in all his waies, to catch him and intrap him; If for a false prophet, then it being immediatly sub∣joyned to the word prophet, thus, The prophet is a snare of a fowler in all his waies, which way our translators take, and for the mak∣ing it more plain as to the construction pre∣mise to the Nown the discretive particle, but, to distinguish the quality of this prophet from that of the watchman before mentioned, but the prophet, viz. which they now have, or without that, as others put it, (understanding by both false prophets) being still taken for such, it will be in respect of what is affirmed still the same, viz. that he is the snare of a fowler, viz. o by whome and whose words, and dealings, as a bird is caught and intangled in the net by a fowler laid for him, so they shall be in∣snared and drawn away from the truth, and the waies of God, and that p in all his waies, whether we understand it with some, of the waies of the prophet, viz. That in all his do∣ings he useth deceit, and that by all meanes he seeketh to seduce men, and directeth all that he doth to that end; or whether with others the waies q of Ephraim, viz. that he can no where go or turne himself but that he shall meet with the snares of this false Prophet, indeavouring and taking all occasi∣ons to draw him away from God, or hin∣dering him from serving him, and by his waies, therefore, some also understand the waies r of God, or as s others of the true pro∣phets, but all comes to one purpose it being evident that the false prophet would direct all his own wa••es to corrupt them in all theirs, and seduce them and hinder them from all the waies of God, and from going to his Tem∣ple and to seek to take out of the way the true Prophet.

The following words hatred in the house of his God, are by ours by supply of the con∣junction, and, coupled to the foregoing, and for what they read in the Text, in the Mar∣gin they put, against the house of his God. As for the signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mastemah, rendred, hatred, we have spoken of it on the foregoing v. and what was there said may be here taken notice of without adding how the Greek, and printed Arabick, Latin and Syriack, (of the ground of whose so rendring it as he doth, the next v. will afford probable conjecture,) render it here as they did there. Then in the following words as to what should be meant by the house of his God, may be again said, what was above said on c. 8.1. viz. that the house of God is a title that may, as the place where it is us∣ed shall require, be attributed to the Temple at Jerusalem. 2. By way of concession or speaking in the language of those who called their Idols, Gods, to the place wherein they worshiped Idols, as at Bethel, which signi∣fies the house of God, and is by some thought here more particularly meant, and in like pla∣ces. 3ly, To the people of Israel themselves who may and are as we then shewed, cal∣led the house of God, and some do under∣stand it here of one of these, some of ano∣ther, and so accordingly are there of these words also, as they bear respect to the pro∣phet before mentioned, different Expositions, some taking by prophet to be understood a true prophet, that they laid snares for him v out of hatred to (or against) the house of his God, Gods Temple and worship; which will also hold if it be understood of the false prophet, that he did what he did, out of spite to (or against as in the Margin of our Bibles) the Temple of his God, (his God) for so God by right still was, though not by him so acknowledged.

w Others likewise understanding it of the true prophet, for whome they laid snares, look on these words as an Epithet of him, and by the Temple of his God understand the people of Israel, as much as to say, they so seek to intrap him as being hatred among them i. e. hated by them; x or else if it be looked on as spoken of a false prophet, that then by way of apposition with what pre∣cedes, it may be meant that the false pro∣phet who is a snare in all his waies, is also hatred, i. e. an hateful an abominable thing in the house of his God, y hating him and hat∣ed by him. Others look on it as denoting t

the false prophet to be hatred in the house of his God, i. e. a cause of hatred between God and Israel, either z causing him to hate them (as some will) or as a others, inducing them to hate him, and in this way Kimchi seemes to make it indifferent whether by the house of God be understood the Temple of the true God, which they b drew men from, or the house of their Idols where they prophe∣cied and which they enticed them to. Others understand it of the hatred and dissentions which were between them, by their false pro∣phets stirred up and occasioned in the house of their Idols, as we have seen in R. Tanchum, who seemes to make them as it were a di∣stinct clause from the former. Junius also as we have seen, here understands them of such mutual hatred as they stirred up among the people for mischief to them, but explaining not what he understands by domo Dei ipsius, in the house of his God. The affixe of the third person in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Elohau, of his God, seeming to stand in opposition to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 elo∣hai with the affixe of the first person, in the first clause of the verse, seemes to c favour that way which understands it of the house of Idols. Others yet think these last words may be read by themselves by way of d ex∣clamation or admiration, hatred in the house of his God. i. e. O what a hateful thing is this in the house of God! R. Solomo thinks this is to be referred to their killing of Zechariah in e the house of the Sanctuary, and their seeking to kill Jeremiah as being an hatred to them, Jer. 26.11. But Kimchi citing this out of the Midrash sheweth that it cannot be so meant, because that was done at Jerusa∣lem by the Jews, but here Ephraim (or the ten Tribes) are spoken of.

The LXX. add here after the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (by which they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Verb f 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Latin tran∣slation renders confixerunt. In some copies it is observed to be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and so it is manifest that the Author of the printed Arabick read it in the Copy that he followed, and distin∣guished the words otherwise, while he ren∣ders it so as that he puts 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by which he renders it, in the Nominative case, and there making a stop, puts as a distinct clause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which answers to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, so that the Latin translator renders super omnes vias ejus adest amentia: de∣scendere fecerunt, in domo Domini. That Verb its manifest is taken from the beginning of the next v. and answers to the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heemiku in that, for which it is also put c. 5.2. and if it were so here placed, as in the Hebrew it is, as the beginning of that v. and not in this, it would make this ren∣dring by g some given 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, madness in the house of God, They have fixed, they be corrupt, which is agre∣able to the Hebrew.

This great variety of Expositions ranked under several heads, as well as we could, according to the ground of them, with which we have presented the reader, justi∣fies that note which we said, is by many set on these words that they are obscure. Very plain, I doubt not, they were when first spoken, and to those that heard them, and knew the Language, Customes, and the manners and transactions of that present age, and what was pointed to, and described in them, but in after ages when the particu∣lar knowledge and memory of those things was lost, and men left much to conjecture, no marvail if obscure. Meanwhile the sever∣al conjectures of several Doctors being set before him he hath freedome of his own al∣so, and liberty of choyce, greater perhaps then he would wish. It will be perhaps too great a boldness to determine to him which among so many he shall confine himself to. I see that h those who have most critically considered them, venture not to do it, but rather leave men in suspense. In my judg∣ment, I think that if he shall take the first exposition which we have given of the first words, agreeable to our translation and joyn to it such of the last as he shall see best to fit with either the reading of ours in the Text or that in the Margin, or else the last, that of R. Tanchum, which for the first and great∣est part of the verse falls wholly in with it, as to the sense, he may well rest satisfied as having a good meaning against which no∣thing may be objected.

Things being thus then in Ephraim needs must there be great wickedness among them, which in the following words is farther de∣clared, in what he saith.

v. 9. They have deeply corrupted them∣selves, as in the daies of Gibeah: therefore he will remember their ini∣quity, he will visit their sins.

They have deeply corrupted themselves as in the daies of Gibeah, &c. In the Geneva Eng∣lish translation it is, they are deeply set, they are corrupt, &c. The Hebrew words are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heemiku shichetu with two

Verbs They are deep, (or have gone deep,) they have corrupted; but i it is observed that where two Verbs are so joyned the force of them may be well expressed by an Adverb, and therefore do ours so here express it, they have deeply corrupted, viz. themselves, as they well supply; or as k others vias suas their waies, or alii alios, some of them the others which the vulgar Latin expresseth by profunde pec∣caverunt, they have deeply sinned. Nor is there any difference made in the sense by render∣ing it passively as in that antienter English version, which we mentioned, l They are cor∣rupt. That we may know what the force of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heemiku profundaverunt They have been deep, or gone deep, is in this and like expressions we may look back and compare what is above said c. 5.2. where the same word is used, and by ours rendred are profound, and Isai. 31.6. where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 profundaverunt defectionem, is by ours rendred, have deeply revolted. By which and by the notion in which profound and deep is in other languages, as the Latin and ours also sometimes used, will appear that it notes, or is taken to express, excess, great or high degree in that which it is spoken of, that it is very much, or great, or firm, and fixed. So that to say they have been deep and cor∣rupted, or deeply corrupted themselves, will be as much as to say, that they are deeply ingaged, much immersed and m rooted in wick∣edness, or wickedness is deeply rooted and fixed in them so that they are hardly to be drawn from it, that it doth not consist in some inconsiderate outward actions only, but is committed by them with deliberati∣on, resolution and purpose of heart, so that they make it their business and seek out meanes to effect and prosecute it; to which purpose some also render n callidum inierunt confilium, they have taken crafty counsel, which consisting in secret plottings and contriving, comes also under the notion of going or being deep; by which meanes it comes to pass that their Sins are as very great and obstinate, so many also; that root of bitterness, deep∣ly fixed in their hearts, continually spring∣ing up and shewing forth its corrupt fruits in the whole frame of their actions, which are accordingly very much, yea wholly cor∣rupt, and the same in great number, as the Chaldee paraphrast looks on the word to im∣port, he rendring it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o mul∣tiplicaverunt corruptionem, they have multi∣plied corruption which is by Mercer in his translation well expressed by Quam corrup∣tissimi sunt, They are in the highest degree corrupt, &c.

That such was then the condition of Is∣rael, and they so deeply corrupted, he farther shews by comparison of their manners to those in the daies p of Gibeah, they are now as lewd and wicked, as corrupt in their man∣ners as those of Gibeah and Benjamin of old were in their daies, when that foul fact was committed in Gibeah, against the Levite and his Concubine, the History of which is re∣corded in the 19. and 20. Chapters of the book of Judges, greater wickedness and vil∣lany than which we no where in Scripture find mentioned, they seeming to exceed even that of Sodom. The fact though committed only by some Children of Belial in Gibeah, yet being justified and defended not only by those of that City, but by all the tribe of Benjamin made them all guilty, and shewed them all to be deeply corrupted in their man∣ners. Wherefore as they were all by this means partakers of the wickedness, so were they also of the punishment, God giving them up to be destroyed, all the whole Tribe except six hundred men alone. And so there∣fore these of the ten Tribes being like them generally and deeply corrupted in their wor∣ship and waies, as he then gave them up to condigne punishment, so will he now shew that they may not think to fare better than they did, as if God would now approve or allow of in them, that against which in those he shewed his just indignation; he threat∣ens therefore them also with proportionable punishment though with great long suffer∣ing he hath hitherto forborn them, causing his prophet to tell them, Therefore he will remember their iniquity he will visit their Sins. The illative therefore being not in the origi∣nal is supplied for connexion sake, and mak∣ing the sense plainer the other expressions of remembring and visiting attributed to God are of known use in Scripture, and need not far∣ther be explained than hath been already done where the same words have before oc∣curred in this prophecy, as they do both to∣gether, c. 8.13. and of visiting see v. 7 of this c.

However by his deferring them so long they might think him to neglect, or forget, or take no notice of their doings, or that he absented himself from them, he will now, by calling them to an account for their sins, and executing on them agreeable judgments, shew that he remembers them, all, and by pu∣nishing will he visit them.

We shall not need to examine any other translations than our one, and what we have seen on this v. in as much as though they may be given in something differing expres∣sions,

yet they concur in the meaning and Ex∣positors well agree in it. R. Tanchum well thus expresseth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have gone deep in wick∣edness and corruption i. e. they have come to the extreme in it; Only, concerning the times of Gibeah St. Jerome and R. Solomo tell us of such who think they may be meant of that act of the peoples rebelling against God in choosing Saul, who was of Gibeah, King. And Jerome seems not to dislike it, but certainly the other seems more apposite and agreeable.

The LXX. here do not express the name of Gibeah but instead of it put 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the daies of the hill. Which is indeed a Tran∣slation of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gibeah, if not taken as a pro∣per name; for it signifies a hill, and the City seems to have borrowed its name from its si∣tuation, but when it is spoken of as a proper name, Drusius well thinks that for avoiding confusion it were better retained in its He∣brew form and sound, than translated accord∣ing to the notion of its roote, or whither might not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 it self in those times in the Greek be looked on as a proper name of that hill country? So q some of the Greek Fa∣thers do look upon it as by that meant, and referr the words to that history which we mentioned. The Syriack also puts here for it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Romtho, which signifies an hill or high place, and is likewise the proper name of a City not far distant from Gibeah. Their wickedness thus described is aggravated from the great ingratitude with which it was accompanied, or the continuance of heredi∣tary rebellion among them.

v. 10. I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness: I saw your fathers as the first-ripe in the fig-tree at her first time: but they went to Baal-peor, and separated themselves unto that shame; and their abominations were according as they loved.

I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness, &c. Abarbinel takes these words to be the beginning of a new section, the fifth prophecy, according to his division. Having, he saith, in that before reproved them for two sorts of whoredome, r carnal and spiritual, he begins this again with reproof of them for adulte∣ry or carnal uncleaness, which makes way for the other and induceth to it. But I sup∣pose that connexion which we have intimated, between these and the preceding words may suffice. That we may the better perceive the scope of this verse, it will be convenient in the first place to enquire who are the per∣sons spoken of in it under the name of Isra∣el, whome God saith he found, and the fathers whome he saw, to be such as he describeth.

St. Jerome seemes to understand by them Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in whome or whose loynes the people Israel then was, and s others follow him in it. But certainly the name of Israel was not known till it was given to Jacob, and no people were then so called, though God had promised that their seed should be a great people, and what follows as spoken of the same persons cannot be said of them. They never fell away from God. We may easier therefore assent to others who by Israel and the fathers, will have us to understand, not Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but such of their ancestors as he brought by the hand of Moses out of Egypt, and framed into a peculiar people, (whome he set his love on) unto himself, and led through the wilder∣ness to bring them to that land, flowing with milk and honey, which he had promised to them, doing in the way all those great things for them which are in the Scripture record∣ed. But how can it be said he found them there, viz. in the wilderness, when he did not light on them being there, but himself brought them thither? This question Abarbinel starts, or gives occasion to make, and it may be tak∣en notice of that we may have a right mean∣ing and import of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Matsati, I found, in this place. It is manifest therefore that it cannot import that God found them there, so as when a man findes a thing in a place which he knew not of, or expected not there to find, but must in some other way be understood, as it is also when we say a man, on proof or tryal, finds such a one to be so; viz. not in respect of the place where he is, but in respect of his behaviour and conditions; and so may it be understood that God found them to be such in respect of their conditions as made them like, or to deserve to be esteemed or looked on as such things to which he compares them. Or else to much like purpose, it may be under∣stood of such affection as a man finds raised in himself, by or towards such or such things, as they please or displease him; so that Gods saying that he found Israel like grapes in the wilderness, will be to say that he found them gracious, delightful and pleasing in his sight. The expressions being taken so to import, will be the same in signification with what is said, Jer. 31.2. The people found grace in the wilderness. Laying the stress or occasion of his so finding them, more on his grace and fa∣vour, than on that loveliness and desert which

was on their part. And to this purpose doth Abarbinel expound it, Although the Lord him∣self, so brought Israel out of Egypt, and did not find them in the wilderness, yet by reason of his love to them they were before him, when he brought them near unto himself, lovely as grapes which a man findes unexpectedly in a vast terrible wil∣derness of fiery serpents, and drought (Deut. 18.15.) when he is hungry and thirsty, in which he rejoyceth, so the Lord rejoyced in that nation when they were in the wilderness of Sinai when they re∣ceived the Law.

To the same purpose likewise most both of Jewish and Christian Expositors, though with some difference in the construction or joyn∣ing of those words, in the wilderness, with the others. The most refer them to the grapes mentioned. Then the sense runs thus, as grapes found in the wilderness, a place not inhabited or tilled, and where ordinarily no fruit, nothing desireable, or conducing to necessity, or delight, usually grows, by a thirsty and hungry travel∣ler, are very pleasing and delightful to him, so were Israel antiently to God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he took great pleasure and delight in them. And in this way the delightfulness of what they are com∣pared to r is set forth first in respect of the nature of the fruit, that it is grapes, among all fruits commended; and 2^ly, in respect to the circumstance of the place, that they are found in the wilderness, a place where either they or any good thing of that nature are seldom found, and where means want of such things makes them more acceptable to them; so that, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 grapes in the wilderness: may well be looked on as a t proverbial speech, to express what is very pleasing and acceptable to a man.

Others refer them to Israel, I found Israel in the wilderness, i. e. at that time when they were in the wilderness. So manifestly the Chaldee paraphrast, rendring, as a vine that is planted by a fountain of water, so in the wilderness did my word meet with Israel: and Kimchi tells us that his Father thought they were to be joyned with I found, viz. I found Israel in the wilderness, as grapes (that pleasing fruit,) and took delight in them. The sense is still the same; and indeed the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Caa∣nabim, as (or like grapes) so placed as it is, may well give us to reflect on both, both on Israels being there, and the grapes being found there, whither by some fountains side there, (as the Chaldee addes,) or otherwise; so that the sense may be as Grotius gives it, As if any travelling through the desert of Arabia, shall meet with grapes, he greatly rejoyceth in them; so God, was pleased when he saw the good car∣riage of the people of Israel in the wilderness. The referring so this expression to Israel at that time to shew Gods complacency in them and love to them, will be justified by what he saith, I remember thee, the kindness, of thy youth the love of thy espousals when thou wentest after me, in the wilderness, in a land not sown, Israel was holyness to the Lord, the first fruits of his increase.

By another comparison in the next words doth he express and repeat the same that in this saying, I saw your Fathers as the first ripe in the figree at her first time. Where, by Fa∣thers we may understand the same that by Israel before, and by his seeing them as the first ripe in the figtree, the same delight in them as was before expressed by saying he found them, or esteemed them as grapes; for among figgs, yea among fruits, that the first or early ripe figgs, are very v desireable, and were alwaies, in such places where figgs grow, very much esteemed, is a thing known and granted, and hath given occasion for such expressions as we here, and elsewhere in Scriptures meet with, to set forth by comparison thereto, things that it would shew to be looked on as amiable and desire∣able. So Jer. 24.2. to express such as were looked on as very good, he represents them under the notion of very good Figgs, and to express those that were reputed such adds, even the figgs that were first ripe, such as he that hath found can scarce abstain from gree∣dily eating them, Is, 28.4.

That which is added in the description of such figgs, in the figg tree 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bere∣shitah, and by ours rendred, at her first time, is by different interpreters differently explain∣ed: by some referring it to the tree and to them in respect to the time (as in ours and others) as either w when the tree first bear∣eth fruit or at its first bearing, it being ob∣served by them that such a fitree x beareth fruit twice in one year; as if those that it bare at the first time were the best, and among them those that are first ripe; by others, in respect of the place, rendring it, in cacumine at the top of it, as where it had advantage of the sunne, and so was like to be better and sooner ripened; by others, to those spoken of, viz. that he saw them at the beginning of the people y when they were first deliver∣ed out of Egypt, such. This may be well understood: but the affixe in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Be∣reshitah so placed as it is seemes to require that it should be referred in the construction ra∣ther to either, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Biccurah the first ripe, or to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Teenah, the figtree, than to any thing understood, as to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abothecem, your fathers, expressed, it cannot; the Nown being in the Plural number and the Affixe likewise Plural, and of the second Person. s

So the Chaldee refers it to the figtree 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which bringeth forth fruit in the first place. The Syriack omits it, of the Greek we shall after see. However this makes no diffe∣rence as to the sense which still will be, viz. that they were pleasing to him, precious in his sight and above all other nations esteemed by him, which that we may inlarge what we before say'd, doth not import so much any advantage to him from them, or ought in them, as the savors and priviledges freely conferred, by him on them. And therefore doth Kimchi well look on these expressions, I found them as grapes in the wilderness, as the first ripe figs as comprehending 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I fed them and nou∣rished them and they wanted nothing as if they had been in an inhabited (or well Cultivated) land, and so Capito, Hoc est, amanter eos ample∣xus, in deserto molliter enutrivi, defendi ab injuriis coeli, difficultate loci, & vi crude∣lissimorum hostium. I found them, I saw them, i.e. I lovingly imbraced them, and gently cherish∣ed them, and defended them from the injuries of the weather, from all difficulties of the place, and force of cruel enemies, and after brought them to a land flowing with Milk and Hony. So Pa∣reus looks on it as signifying, his bringing them by his power out of Egypt and miraculous su∣steining them in the wilderness; so, that there is to be looked on for having the mean∣ing of these figurative Expressions, non causa sed qualitas amoris, not the cause but the qua∣lity of the love, and not so much propter quid sed quam impense eos amaverit, not for what, but how greatly he loved them; and this evidently the more, because in such grapes and figgs there is of their own nature, that which is delightful and allures men to take pleasure in them, but in these persons spoken of, his finding them such, was no other than reputing them such, of free love, according to what himself declareth Deut. 7.78.

Gods dealing then with them, being such, certainly they could not without great in∣gratitude but use their utmost endeavours and continue to walke in all well pleasing to him, and worthy of his love, that they might preserve that relation between him and them entire, so as not to provoke him to cast them off, or turn away his Eyes from them; but see their perversness; they make light of his love toward them, turn away from him, and turn that comeliness, which he having z put on them, is say'd to have found and seen in them, and to have delighted in, into abominable shame. So that now if any should look on them as grapes he should find their vine to be of the vine of Sodome and of the fields of Gomorrah, and their grapes, grapes of gall, and their clusters bitter, as he Expresseth it Deut. 32.32. or on them as grapes in the wilderness, no otherwise then as it may signify wilde grapes as he termes them Isai. 5.4. and if as figs he should find them like those described Jer. 24.3. in opposition to the first ripe figs, that are very good.

Very naughty figs that could not be eaten, they were so had, or as in the Margin (for badness) and indeed there is an Exposition which go∣ing clean contrary to that which we have seen, look upon them here as compared to such wild grapes, and naughty figs. It is cited by y Abarbinel out of an ancient Rabbi∣nical book, and is to this purpose; As grapes in the wilderness I found Israel; As grapes there growing, are fair without, and filthy within, so were Israel when they stood on mount Sinai; they sayed, z all that the Lord shall speak that will we do, and hear. Behold this was in their mouth, but their heart was not right. As it is said They flattered him with their Mouth and lyed unto him with their Tongue. For their heart was not right with him, neither were they sted∣fast in his covenant Ps. 78.36, 37. to omit another which they adde, making the chief of them likened to the good part of the grape, the common multitude to the stones in them, and what else they say, as being little to the pur∣pose. But then of the other comparison of them to the first ripe figs, they make not out the meaning proportionable, that I find.

But a there is a Christian Expositor who taking the same way as to the first, doth it also as to the second, understanding by grapes in the wilderness, primo aspectu gratas, sed gustu acerbas, such as are fair to sight but sower in tast, and by the first figs,

the fruit of a fig-tree that bringeth forth before o∣thers which being not yet ripe, draws, or invites, the eyes of the hungry traveller to it self, but when he comes near to it, or puts it to his mouth, he is soon offended with the harshness which he finds in it: so the Israelites in the wilderness seemed such as God delighted in for a while, but did soon frustrate his expectation and shew∣ing forth their wickedness, went into the temple of Baal Peor the Idol of the Mo∣abites.

This exposition gives an intelligible meaning, and such as may seem well enough to agree with the place, yet I think may for this be excepted against, because though we read of wild grapes, and evil grapes, and naughty figs as well as good, as we have a∣bove seen, yet I think we do not any where find the first ripe figs spoken of, but in way of commendation and therefore may justly think these here to be compared at that time when so God looked on them with delight, to them, not for any ill quality, but as the noblest and most delicious of fruits; so set∣ting x

forth Israel at that time, as the b most acceptable to God among all people. And so in the more received way of Expounding these first words have we in them set forth that respect to, and esteem of them, which God had, and how things were on his part to them, and then have we in the following a description of their perverse and unsincere dealing with him. But they went to Baal Peor and separated themselves unto that shame &c.

The first particle But is by ours supplied for the plainer connexion of the words with the preceding, being not found in the He∣brew which hath only, They went; but then is included, and supplied by an c Emphasis laid on the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hemmah They i.e. even they those very persons to whom God shewed such respect 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bau Baal Peor, went to Baal Peor. By the verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bau, which ours translate they went to, d some will have to be implied as much as to say, they committed adultery (as Idolatry is often called) with, according to the use of that word in Scripture as Gen. 16.2. Sarah saith to Abraham 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bo na, Goe now in unto my maide. e Others understand it of going to his temple or place where he was worship∣ed. It is plain enough that he means that they applied themselves to the worship of that I∣dol, and worshiped, and sacrificed to, him; and the general signification of going to, by ours used, well comprehends, all that is gi∣ven for expressing the meaning of it.

The history of what they did is recorded Num. 25.2.3. where what we read, and they called the people to the sacrifices of their Gods, and the people did eat, and bowed down to their Gods, is here more briefly expressed by, They went to Baal Peor, and what follows there, and Israel joyned himself to Baal Peor here by, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vayinnazeru Labbo∣sheth and separated themselves (or were sepa∣rated) unto that shame, the separating themselves to, being the same with to be joyned, or joyn themselves to a thing, viz. their sepa∣rating from, and leaving, other things, to cleave to that alone; as here their forsaking God was that they might cleave to that shame, i. e. to that shameful Idol Baal Peor, before mentioned. So it is manifest our translators meant, by, as many others do, pointing him out by that demonstrative particle that, that particular shame. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boshet shame is elsewhere also used to express any Idol, Idols being shameful abominable things; and therefore by way of disgrace expressed often in the Scripture by such common words as signify such things, restrained and appro∣priated to them as their proper names. f So are they called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shikkutsim abomi∣nations, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gilulim Dungy things, and as else where (Jer. 3.24. and 11.13.) so here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boshet, shame; a name well befitting any Idols, as in themselves shameful things and bringing shame to those that worship them. Any Baal was such, so that those names were even equivalent; as appears by Jerubbaal, and Jerubeshet, being one name and of the same man 2 Sam. 11.21. But in the highest degree, then will it agree to Baal Peor here mentioned, if he were, as is by many conjectured, that filthy and fowlest of all the heathen Idols g Priapus whose h worship con∣sisted in the obscenest behaviour that could be shewed, and whose name some conjecture to have in it the notion of turpitude; but as to that (his name I mean) it is, I think, the plainest derivation that it was given him from the hill Peor, where he was worshipped, as sounding, the Lord of Peor. Mean while if nothing be added but that he was an Idol (though their behaviour in their cleaving to him may argue him more than an ordinary one) is sufficient to make him deserve that name of Boshet, shame, even in the abstract. Yet did they forsaking the holy and noble service of God, separate and devote them∣selves to his service which the Chaldee ren∣ders by erring or running astray. The Sy∣riack renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ethnezaru by a verb of the same root with the Hebrew, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nazar, and the Latin Translator thereof renders Nazaraeos fecerunt se ignominiae, They made themselves Nazarites to shame; that so that Verb signifies in that language there is no doubt as well as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nazir in the Hebrew si∣gnifies, as more generally one that is sepa∣rated, so particularly a Nazarite who conse∣crating himself to God by vow, shews it in abstaining from such or such things accord∣ing as the law required, Num. 6. from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nazar to separate himself, and so may that Verb also in the Syriack be used in the more general notion of separating, but while there is added, to such a thing, it argues that the end of any ones separating himself from o∣ther things, is to cleave to that, and so the rendring of the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they were alienated (or estranged themselves) k to shame or turpitude. The estrangeing themselves is still by forsaking God, to dedicate or devote them∣selves to that which is called shame. Which therefore the MS. Arab. well expresseth by a i

Verb, denoting not so much separation, as the Hebrew properly signifies, as adhe∣rence, rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they devoted themselves to that shame. The words, though seeming of a different signification be∣tween themselves, yet in this way both making the same meaning viz. of addicting or applying themselves to that which is called shame. By which as we said, seems to be peculiarly meant the Idol before mentioned.

Yet l are there who take it in its more ge∣nerall signification, and expound it, they sepa∣rated themselves, in magnam sui confusionem, to their own great confusion or shame. And so Abarbinel takes it to be, understanding it of their committing whoredome with the daugh∣ters of Moab, which was a shame and re∣proach to them. This will be a necessary con∣sequent of the other, but by, that, I suppose to be chiefly meant that shameful thing, which they worshipped and his shameful service by performing which they brought on them∣selves that shame which they did, and that Bosheth or shame to have been the mentioned Baal Peor or some other like, together with him worshipped.

For though he be named as chief, yet that there were others that were worshipped with him (or at least divers images of him; to any of which that name Bosheth well a∣grees, as common to all) seems apparent by what is said in the forecited place out of Num. 25. where the history here alluded to is set down, in that as Baal Peor is by name mentioned, as he to whom Israel joyned him∣self v. 3. so v. 2. it is said that they viz. the daughters of Moab with whom they com∣mitted whoredome, called the people unto the sacrifices of their Gods, in the plural number, and, the people did eat, and bowed down to their Gods, of which then in the next v. he saith, and Israel was joyned unto Baal Peor; under that name comprehending those called Gods and their worship.

The same also seems intimated by the fol∣lowing words here, as by ours translated, and their abominations were as they loved, which translation to answer to the Hebrew, as to the notion of the words, is evident; only that they supply, their, which in that is not expres∣sed, where the words are only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and abominations were as they loved, according to which translation of ours the meaning seems to be, that they had as ma∣ny abominations i. e. abominable Idols, which as we observed above, are also called m shikkutsim, as they n loved, or liked to choose to themselves. Which rendring and interpretation I suppose we may as well im∣brace, as any other we shall meet with; al∣though there are others given, of which that we may judge as well as of our own, it will be convenient to observe that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ceahabam rendred by ours, as they loved, may be taken either for a Noun and so rendred sicut amor ipsorum, as their love, or, according to their love, or else for an o infinitive Mood which will sound juxta a∣mare ipsos, according as they loved.

And here is variety of Expositions. The briefest, (as I may call it because it just ex∣presseth the words and requires nothing to be supplied or understood, as others, we see do) among them that are suggested, may be, p & abominationes erant sicut amor ipsorum a∣bominations were as their love, i. e. as things beloved by them, their chief love. Some un∣derstand the word abominations or abominable as spoken of them because of their love to that which they loved; as the Vulgar Latin which render Facti sunt abominabilies sicut ea quae dilexerunt, and are become abominable as those things which they loved, viz. q as abomi∣nable as those Idols themselves, to which they addicted themselves, taking abominations, for abominable, and love for the thing beloved, seeing by the love of things men are as it were changed into the same nature with them. Which sense Thomas Aquinas, as Ribera notes, insists on, while he makes this a proof actus humanos speciem habere ex objectis according to what is said Ps. 115.8. they that make them are like unto them, and so is every one that trusteth in them, with which the Geneva English agrees, And their abominations were according to their lovers. For though their words may seem to differ, yet they shew their meaning to be the same in their Note thus explaining it, They were as abominable to me as their lovers, the Idols. s Besides it was not possible but that by serving them they should be so corrupted in their manners as to render them abominable. Others under∣standing it likewise of the object of their love, or what they loved, will have thereby meant those daughters of Moab, the lewd women which they loved, and then make the mean∣ing to be that they were abominations or be∣came abominable, according to their love of those women. So Kimchi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. They were (given) to worship abominations r

according as they loved the daughters of Moab, and committed fornication with them and they in∣clined their hearts to serve their Gods, of which t diverse will have the meaning to be, that they had as many abominations or false Gods, as they had women of different nations which worshiped different Idols. Aben Ezra doth not differ from this, in explaining it They were polluted, or became ahominable 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by reason of their love of the Mi∣dianitish women. R. Solomo likewise seems to point out the same, whilst he only gives this short gloss 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as they loved 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the daughters of Moab viz. as they lov∣ed the daughters of Moab; so they worship∣ed the abominations of Moab. To the same purpose tends that explication which ex∣pounds it u per amores suos by their loves. So the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 w Bemohabbatehem by or in their love. Abarbinel likewise by their love looks on as denoted, the daughters of Moab; and not only so, but the preceeding 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bosheth or shame also to respect them; his exposition being, notwithstanding all this viz. that God had shewed such respect to their Fathers, they made themselves vile, and whereas they were beloved of me, became a∣bominable, in what concerned them; for behold when they came unto Baal Peor they separated themselves from their modesty and holyness, unto that shame, viz. To commit wheredome with the daughters of Moab which was to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lebosheth a shame and also reproach and their love to those whores a marveilous abomination and great filthyness; that is it which he saith, and they were abominations according to their love, that is to say, they became abominations (or abominable) and filthy, as their love of those daughters of Moab, was abomination and filth∣ness, or abominable and filthy.

There is yet another x different way of ex∣position which takes not their love for what they loved, or their love to it, but for that love with which God loved them, so as to sound they are now become abominable, as they were before loved, or the abhorrence or detestation which I have now of them is as great as my love toward them formerly was. Which some look upon as the most ge∣nuin in as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ahobam, the infi∣nitive Mood active with an affixe denoting the person loved, rather denotes that ano∣ther loved them, than that they loved ano∣ther. And in this sense we may well look on the LXXII. to have taken the words, whe∣ther we read in them, according to what we have in the Text of the London Polyglot 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they that are abominated became as they that were loved, viz. now abominated as they were before be∣loved; or else as we have it there in the va∣rious readings z 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. which reading the printed Arabick also follows 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they that were beloved, became as those that were abomi∣nable. viz. By that means they who were be∣fore beloved, (which is all one as to say whom he loved) became to be now as much abominated, qui antea quidem dilecti sue∣runt Deo propter patres nunc execrabiles facti sunt, to use a Theophylacts Language applying it to the Jews, they which were be∣fore beloved of God for their Fathers sakes, now are become execrable.

b Cappel puts another meaning on them, as if according to them they were a promise that the Gentiles which were before abominable, should by their calling to Christ become be∣loved and he thinks that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ceahobam they did read Chahubim sicut di∣lecti, as beloved; but Buxtorf, not without seeming good reason, contradicts him and shews that the meaning which he gives in making it as a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles is not here to the purpose and scope of the place, and that of his different reading there is no need.

The other waies which we have mention∣ed, of several rendrings and expositions, do all give such meanings as, to the thing, are true, and may well agree to the scope of the place, to shew the ungrateful, rebelli∣ous, and lewd behaviour of those Israelites of old to whom he had shewed so gracious re∣spect, and may well be justified by the words in the original, which hath made Interpre∣ters to take some one, some another, accord∣ing to their several judgments as they best liked. That of our own translation we may, I think, as we said, well acquiesce in, with which the ancient Syriac seems very well to agree (which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as the latin translator, who was a Syriac Maronit renders it, Et dedicerunt se abomi∣nationi prout amaverunt and they gave them∣selves to abomination as they loved) for I think it may be rendred also otherwise viz. sue∣runt abominationi sicut illud quod amaverunt and they were for an abomination as that which they loved, which would then agree with the vulgar Latin, and with the Chaldee also which hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d Et facti sunt abominabiles secundum quod dilexe∣runt, y c

although that also is capable of being rendred as ours do render the Hebrew, with the like supply of their viz. and abominations i. e. their abominations were as they loved.

This being said as for the signification and meaning, the rendring and exposition of the words, there remains a question to be solved, viz. the words being only a rehersal of a sin of which their forefathers were guilty, and for which they were then punished, and not by any express words applyed to these, their poste∣rity so many generations after, how they are to be looked on as any way concerning them who are at present spoken to, and what con∣nexion and dependence is between them and the other words, and for what reason they may seem in this place inserted? This que∣stion it will be easy to answer in diverse re∣spects, according to which these words will appear to be pertinent to the scope of the place. In the preceding verse he shews the greatness of the lewdness of this present ge∣neration, by comparing their doings with thoseof theirs in the daies of Gibeah, and why may it not suffice to say that in these also he did the same by comparing their car∣riage to those of their ancestors in the matter of Peor as he calls it Numb. 25.18.31.16. or the iniquity of Peor Jos. 27.17. and of the Moabitish and Midianitish women, and well may here be understood, though not expressed as there it is, they have deeply corrupted themselves, as they in those days did. So doth Kimchi well look upon it as necessarily under∣stood after this said of their fathers, for ap∣plication of it, to their present demeanour, According to the doing of the fathers, so do also the sons do, I did good to your fathers and they rebelled against me, so also I have done good to you and ye have transgressed against me. And then will it, here inserted, farther clear Gods justice in executing on them such judgments as both in the preceeding and following words he denounceth against them the wick∣ed posterity of wicked fathers continuing to do as they did, and to take away all pre∣sumption on their being the Children of those whom God had chosen for his peculiar peo∣ple, or that for their righteousness they should escape the punishment of their own sins. They might, though not able to deny their own evil doings, be apt to presume upon the righteousness of their fathers, and say God found them as grapes in the wilderness, as the first ripe figs in the which he much delighted, and promised much good to them both in their per∣sons and their posterity, and would there∣fore doubtless preserve them, if not for their own, yet for their fathers sake, and for their righteousness. Such presumption is here taken off by shewing that though God at first took such delight in their fathers and shewed such great favour to them, yet they did not answer his favour and love with such behaviour toward him, as that he might in Justice continue it to them, but forfeit∣ed it to themselves, yea provoked him to great displeasure against them, by instance∣ing in an example, which set before their eyes both their wickedness and Gods dis∣pleasure for it manifested in a signal judg∣ment on them which their former well-pleas∣ing could not keep off from themselves, much less from their posterity such punish∣ments as they deserve by their own sins added to their fathers ill deserts. Had their fathers continued in their first estate of obedience to God and ready compliance with him, they might have hoped that for those their fathers sakes he would have been gracious to them notwithstanding such unworthyness in them∣selves they should still have been beloved for the fathers sakes, as the Apostle speaks Rom. 11.28. and for their sakes still spared as when, though he were angry with Solomon, yet he deferred punishing of him for his father Da∣vids sake 1 Kings 11.12. v. 32. & 34. & 36. and again in Abijams time c. 15.4. &c. he repeats it that notwithstanding the evill of his waies, God for Davids sake did give him a lamp in Jerusalem, as likewise that for a long time he would not destroy Judah not∣withstanding the great wickedness of their Kings and people for David his servants sake 2 Kings 8.19. with several like passa∣ges making good his promise of shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love him and keep his commandement Ex. 20.6. Or had they duly laid to heart this story, and considering the wickedness of their fathers and the great wrath of God toward them for it, shewed in the destruction of four and twenty thousand of them in one day, e∣ven all the men that followed Baal Peor, Deut. 4.3. taken warning not to be Idola∣ters as they were, nor to commit fornicati∣on as they did, the shamefulness of which sins they could not but perceive by the pu∣nishment thereof in them, then might they have well hoped that their fathers sins should not have been imputed to them, but they should find true what God elsewere saith, that the son which seeth all his fathers sins which he hath done and considereth and doth not the like, shall not die, for the iniquity of his father but shall surely live. Ezeckiel 18.14.17. But now it being far otherwise with these here spoken to, there being no righteousness of their fathers, none in them by God to be looked on, neither of them otherwise than

as sower grapes and very evil figs, they a wicked generation who had, as by inheri∣tance, claimed and derived to themselves their fathers corruptions, and instead of re∣penting for what their fathers did, im∣proved in themselves the stocke of their sins, how shall it be but apparently just in God to call to remembrance against them their fathers sins as an agravation of their own, and for both to execute on them who forsook their own mercy and left no place for it, such judgments whereby he might vindicate his own glory and justice, least it should be thought that he was altogether such a one as themselves or their Idols, and delighted in such doings.

There is another question started by Abar∣binel, why their fathers having committed many other sins in the wilderness, as in the matter of the Golden Calfe and their often murmurings and much disobedience, which might seem as great faults, as that of the iniquity of Baal Peor, yet this should here be singly named? and he gives this answer to it, because this was most agreeable to the sin, that now he was particularly reproving them for, which he takes to be fornication or adultery of which he had above accused them c. 7. rather than for Idolatry, and that this story therefore is mentioned not so much in regard to their worshiping of the Idol Baal Peor, as their committing whoredome with the Moabitish women, and that the judge∣ments, in the next verse denounced, do pe∣culiarly respect that sin. But, I think, he is too nice, if not in making the question, yet in his answer to it, in as much as the words mentioning their going from God to Baal Peor, which was by the enticement of those women without mentioning expresly them, for description of their sin, seems rather to comprehend both, both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cor∣porall fornication viz. with women and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Spiritual with Idols, as he calls it, without restraining it to the former in these words, and leaving the other to be spoken of in the 10^th c. as he would have it. It is mani∣fest that in that fact of Baal Peor, those of old were guilty of both sorts; and that these now spoken to were so also, and that in re∣spect to both, that history may be well a∣dapted for expressing the condition and man∣ners of the then present time. And what difference soever he may make between sins, in comparing them, as to the greatness of them, it is manifest that, that of Baal Peor was such as was of very great and contagious malignity, ill and durable influence, as ap∣pears by the use made of that story, by the other tribes in their message to the Reube∣nites, Gadites, and halfe tribe of Manasseth, when they had built an Altar without the land of Canaan which they suspected had been for Idolatrous ends; they mention not there the Golden Calfe or any other sins, but thus expostulate with them, Thus saith the whole Congregation of the Lord, what trespass is it that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turne away this day from fol∣lowing the Lord, in that ye have builded an Al∣tar that ye might rebell this day against the Lord? Is the iniquity of Peor to little for us, from which we are not cleansed untill this day, al∣though there was a plague in the congregation of the Lord, But that ye must turne away from following the Lord? And it will be, seeing ye rebell to day against the Lord, that to morrow, he will be wroth with the whole Congregation of Israel, Joshua 22.16. &c. By their thus ar∣guing, it appears that they looked on that iniquity of Peor as a sin of very malignant and durable, as we said, influence, such as though they were punished for it with a plague, by which all the men that followed Baal Peor were destroyed from among them, yet they were not so cleansed thereby, nor their fault so expiated, but that upon any other rebellion it would again be called to remembrance, to adde to the weight of the punishment which should be inflicted on them. So that as the Rabbins say that there was never any judgment on Israel in which there was not an ounce of the iniquity of the Golden Calfe, they might seem with as much reason to say, in which there was not an ounce of the iniquity of Baal Peor. It appears that in the forecited transactions be∣tween the whole congregation of Israel and the two tribes and an halfe, it seemed to them that if they had by a new rebellion provoked the wrath of God, that of Baal Peor would have been again taken notice of, as a sin, the defilement of which yet remained upon them. And the mention of that story here seems to intimate no less than that, that sin of old by their fathers committed, see∣ing they did imitate it in committing the like, had now also influence in calling down on them those judgments threatned to them, and did add to the weight both of the sin and punishment, which punishment in what it should consist, the next words partly shew.

But before wee pass from this v. we may take notice of one thing, though it do not much concern our purpose or conduce to the meaning of the words, which is, a very different reading in some Greek Copies be∣tween themselves in the rendring of some of the words thereof; there being in some of them instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cebiccurah and I saw your fathers as the first ripe inthe figtree at her first time 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the g Latin renders Si∣cut

scopum in ficu temporaneum vidi patres eorum, but in others, h 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. as an early fig in the figtree I saw their fathers. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the 8. v. is used for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isopheh a watchman, and so it is known to signify; as also a marke, and so is here taken by the Author of the printed Arabick translation, who renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & ut custodem primum in ficu, and as the first keeper in the figree. If it be so taken, there is a great difference betwixt the two readings, and I would then know what they, who where there is difference betwixt the Greek and usuall Hebrew, would have us directed by the Greek to find out the true reading of the Hebrew anciently, would advise us here, and in like cases to do, to which of those readings in the Greek they would have us to adjust the Hebrew. Certainly the surer way will be adhering to the Hebrew rather to bring other readings and rendrings to that, which Theophylact here doth, saying i scopum, hoc est, metam & speculam ap∣pellat praecocem ficum, quod omnes speculen∣tur, seu primo prodeuntem: and Nobilius ob∣serving that there is the like variety in di∣verse copies of the Greek in Nahum 3.12. saith, quare videndum &c. it is therefore to be considered whether it, (viz.) the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may signify the first ripe fruit, as the Hebrew hath it, if it may be found or taken so to do, for ordinarily it doth not, then would both these readings in the Greek be reconciled between themselves, and both well enough agree with the Hebrew.

V. 11.12. As for Ephraim, their glory shall flie away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception.

Though they bring up their children, yet will I bereave them, that there shall not be a man left: yea, wo also to them when I depart from them.

Though they bring up children &c. The first words in the 11. v. wherein as we said, E∣phraims punishment is described though by ours very well, as to the meaning, rendred, yet are in the Hebrew otherwise placed than in the translation viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim caoph yithophaph cebodam, word for word Ephraim as a bird shall sly a∣way their glory, which placeing of the words hath given to some occasion of differently distinguishing the sentence. So the LXXII. and printed Arab. and so the vulgar Latine, place∣ing a comma after the word shall fly away, renders it Ephraim quasi avis avolavit, glo∣ria eorum a partu, & ab utero, & a conceptu, which is as the Doway translation renders it, Ephraim as a bird hath flown away, their glory from birth and from the womb and from conception; which reading makes the sentence to containe two distinct members, and as to the first words suggests to k some this expo∣sition, that Ephraim was soon, like a bird got out of the cage, flown away or revolted from God, refusing to abide with him or re∣turn to him; as if it were a description of their defection from God and his law, and from the waies of their pious fathers; and so they look on the Verb as (though in Hebrew it be of the future Tense shall fly,) in the sig∣nification of the praeter tense hath flown a∣way, so the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the Arab. ren∣ders likewise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the Latine avolavit hath flown away; To others, this, Ephraim hath slown i. e. shall suddenly fly, as Lyra saith that avolavit hath flown in the vulgar Latine, must be understood for avolabit shall fly, l i. e. be speedily carried away as on the wing, out of their own country into capti∣vity, as if it were a prophecy thereof, to o∣mit that other Exposition by Cyril mention∣ed, applying it of their flying into Egypt to seek help.

Then according to these the following words are a distinct clause, describing E∣phraims present condition, who gloryed and prided themselves in their great abundance and fruitfulness of Children and people, of which Lyra sets down as a cause, that their women faciliter concipiebant & sine periculo pariebant, did easily conceive and brought forth without danger. Which conjecture is perhaps grounded on that story of the Midwives to Pharaoh, Ex. 1.19. that the Hebrew women were not as the Egyptian women, for they were lively and were delivered ere the Midwives came in unto them, or I know not on what else. And then according to these the next verse, is a threat of the change of this their glory, by Gods bereaving them of what they gloryed in, though m some think, that for making up the sense, having referred the verb, shall fly (or hath flown) to the first clause, they should again here repeat it, Ephraim is flown away as a bird, their glory is flown away from the birth &c. But however this may be made out, certainly it will be a plainer way by much to take the words as cohering and making up one clause, as in ours and many other translations it is done, Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth &. And this way n even many who follow the vulgar Latin prefer to follow, without

having regard to the distinction put in the ordinary copies, after the word avolavit is flown away, and o joyning in construction that verb not with Ephraim, but with their glory, not, Ephraim, but, their glory is flown (or shall fly away.) And in this way there will be no great difficulty in explaining the words thus, E∣phraim, (then making a little pause,) i. e. as ours well render it) As for Ephraim, that so the Pronoune their, in the next words may not seem superfluous, as p some say it to be, their glory shall fly &c.

The glory of a people being taken in that notion as to signify that wherein they have occasion to glory, as giving them re∣nown and credit for something of excellency which they enjoy in an eminent manner, the glory of Ephraim, may be a notation, 1. of God, from whom being in himself most glo∣rious and the only truly glorious, must ne∣cessarily be derived, and communicated glory to all persons or things in near relation to him. So was it certainly to Israel by his making, and owning them for, his peculiar, so that, for that reason, they were by other nations admired as a great nation, For what nation is there so great that hath God so nigh unto them? Deut. 4.6.7. &c. He is to any the only matter of true glory, according as it is written he that gloryeth, let him glory in the Lord 1 Cor. 1.31. out of Jer. 9.23.24. where they are forbidden to glory in any thing else. While they were his people, he was certainly their glory; they still pretend∣ed so to be, and doubtless therefore would call him their glory (as he is also called, Jer. 2.11.) and pretend to that priviledge of right in and to him. q Some therefore would have this title here attributed to him and that he threatens a suddain departure from them, which he mentions again in the 12. v. Wo to them, when I depart from them, according as he also threatned above c. 5.6. and 15^th.

2ly. It may be a notation of their noble ancestors, Abraham Isaac and Jacob &c. who by their near relation to God, were made so glorious as to derive glory to all their posterity, which should walke in their steps, and approve themselves like them. They were not only glorious in themselves, but were a glory to all that came from them, of which they might deservedly boast, (as in the Gos∣pel we find, that this was a matter that they much boasted of, that Abraham was their father, that they were Abrahams seed and children Math. 3.9. Jo. 8.33. as if none could be greater than Abraham, and that they had great reason to glory in him, v. 53. and his glory was indeed a glory to them, according to the usual practice of men to glory in the nobility of their fathers and the glory of Children are their fathers Prov. 17.6. And if any people had to glory in this kind, of their original and noble extract, surely they above any in the earth. But this glory was already in good part flown away from them, by reason of their degenerating from the vertues of their forefathers, in for∣saking their God in whom alone they glory∣ed, and their pious waies and works which made them glorious, so far, as that indeed they deserved not to be accounted to have any relation to them, but to be such as they would have renounced by an utter abdicati∣on, according to the way of our Saviors ar∣guing John 8.39. where to the Jews boast∣ing, Abraham is our father, Jesus said, If ye were Abrahams Children ye would do the works of your father, and v. 41. Ye do the deeds of your father and v. 44. Ye are of your father the De∣vil, and the lusts of your father you will do. By doing the lusts of him they shew him to be their father, and not Abraham, whose workes they would not do; so of these Ephtaimites here may it well be said, and that they had no right to any glory redounding to them from those fathers whose deeds they would not imitate that by so doing they might prove and manifest a relation to them. So far was their Glory in this kind already gone, and what was left of any such carnal Privi∣ledges, on the wing, and swiftly like to fly away by reason of that contemptible condition to which they should be brought in that Capti∣vity denounced to them, when they should be dispersed among those Nations, which knew not the Greatness of Abraham r the fa∣ther of many nations, nor the Excellency of Isaac and Jacob, and would not value them the more for their sakes, but rather despise them for having nothing left to glory of but only the Excellency of those who so long since were dead and had left so degenerate a Posterity.

3ly. By the Glory of a people, may be de∣noted their Wealth and Riches and Might, their Splendour and Kingdome, which to be among those things that usually men boast and glory in appeares, as by common Experience, so by the Prohibition for men to glory in them, in the forecited Jer. 9.23. Let not the mighty man glory in his Might, let not the rich man glo∣ry in his Riches, which intimates that these are things that men do usually account glory, or matter of glorying to themselves: and these will s some have to be by, their glory, here understood, and that they are here in∣cluded, and that they should be ere long

devested of the glory of them, by the destru∣ction to be brought on them by the Spoiler the Assyrian, is no doubt; but as evident that they are not here chiefly and particularly meant, but a fourth thing which might in their own esteem, and the esteem of others also, be accounted their Glory, which is their Fruitfulness and Abundance in Children, and, by that means caused, their great Num∣ber and Multitude of People; Childrens chil∣dren are the Crown of old men, Prov. 17.6. forecited, and In the multitude of People is the kings honour, Prov. 14.28. and so the king∣doms also. Though Gods forsaking them and withdrawing his Glory from them, be the cause of the departure of this Glory from them, and their Glory in the other ac∣ceptions necessarily taken away together with this, yet that this is here more particularly understood, manifestly appears by the fol∣lowing words in which are described the kindes, in which it is said their Glory shall fly from them, and the means by which it shall be effected. That all Israel had to glory of in this kind we may well think when we hear God promising in the Law, that he would bless the fruit of their Womb, — and that they should be blessed above all people, there should not male nor female be barren among them, Deut. 7.13, 14. a common Promise to all Israel; and here all along this Prophecy up∣der the name of Ephraim, have we ten Tribes comprehended, yet can we not but look on the t particular Tribe of Ephraim, as chiefly enjoying the Priviledge of the Kingdom and Chief among them, so also chief in this Glo∣ry, when we have Jacobs particular Prophe∣cy of their father Ephraim, u whose name in∣cludes Fruitfulness, Gen. 41.53. that he should be greater than his elder brother, and his seed should be a multitude of nations, Gen. 47.10. This was made good to that Tribe by the Blessing of God, and they had hitherto en∣joyed that Glory, as likewise those other Tribes under their name comprehended, in eminent manner; but now having broken co∣venant with God, and caused him to with∣draw himself and his Blessing from them, shall that also by his just Judgment be taken from them, as certainly, so speedily: he saith it shall flie away as a bird. Which we may ea∣sily conceive to be a proverbial expression, denoting Speed and Swiftness, from the swift∣ness of a Bird. The Chaldee adds an Em∣phasis to it, by rendring the house of Ephraim as a bird which they have driven from her nest flies away, so doth their glory go away. The fright adds to her speed.

Now the means by which, and manner how, their Glory shall be caused thus to flie away, are in the following words expressed, from the Birth, from the Womb, and from the Conception. w From the birth, by the dy∣ing of the children as soon as they were born, and their mothers had endured that pain which should have been recompensed by the joy that a man was born into the world; their birth being but a coming into the world that they might go out of it, and leave sorrow to their Parents, or being still born, x or dying in the very birth. And 2. from the womb, by the dying of what was therein conceived within it, and its proving abortive, y ob de∣fectum partus, by the failure of birth. 3. From the conception, by their womens not having power to conceive, at least not to retain or perfect their Conception, but proving bar∣ren and unfruitful. These are the degrees or wayes by which God saying he will hin∣der them from multiplying in children, it must needs be brought to pass that their Glory which in that they placed would quickly fly away, and be taken from them, there being none of these things capable of receiving Glory, or of being cause of Glo∣ry to them. There follows in the beginning of the 12. v. another, Though they bring up their children, I will bereave them that there shall not be a man left. This way seems z more grievous then either, or all, of the rest, it being a depriving them of that Glory which they now seemed to be possessed of and might have conceived hope of retaining.

That we may have what is in these words meant, we shall consider the terms of the Expression 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci im yigaddelu eth benebem, which according to the Interlineary sound quia si enutrierint filios suos, For if they shall nurse up their children. The first particles ci im, do indeed so literally sound for if, and so the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the printed Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be∣cause if, (or though) they, &c. and if they should be so rendred it might seem some∣thing to alter the sense from what we have given, and make these words a reason why their Glory should speedily fly away, from the Birth, and from the Womb, and from the Conception, i. e. they should not glory in con∣fidence of multitude of children through the fruitfulness of their Women which had con∣ceived or were great with child, or had al∣so brought forth; for of all this Glory should they suddenly be deprived by his bereaving them of those children by that time that they had brought them up to any bigness, and all their pains about them, and hopes from them, should come to nought.

And this Connexion of the words seem the Greek Fathers as Cyril and Theophylact in their way also to take; but the most of La∣tine and other Expositors take another way in rendring these particles so as to make them not a reason of the former but a another degree beyond them, of that Judgment by which God threatens that their Glory should fail and depart from them. So do ours, rendring them, though, without, be∣cause, or, for, premised, and so most others render it quod si, but if, or, etiamsi although or the like, making the particle not causal but exceptive, to shew that if or though they be not prevented by the former wayes from having Children, yet there is another by which the Glory or Comfort which they conceived from them should not be lasting but suddenly cut off; though they bring up their children, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 jegadoelu bene∣hem, the Verb is from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gadal which signifies, to be great, and hath in it that notion of Greatness as it is appliable either to b q••antity or quality, both Bigness, Dignity, Number, Wealth, Stature, Years, or any like kind. Hence, in the form here put, it is used for to nurse, or bring up, (that tending to increase of Stature and Years) to make big; so that it will import, if any of their children live so long as to grow up to some age or greatness, yet that these shall be cut off and not live to be a Glory to them; so sound the words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 veshicaltim, yet will I bereave them, &c. the Interlineary hath & orbabo eos, and I will bereave them, for so the Conjunction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ve primarily fig∣nifies, and yet is it sometimes superfluous as to the signification and only gives to the Verb a future signification, and is in rendring omitted as it is here in the Greek, and both printed and MS. Arabick and Syriack and vulgar Latin, or else rendred, as serving only for inference sake, ••et, as in ours and c others, or tum then as Drusius; Junius, and Tremel∣lius express the force of it by ita, so will I bereave them that, &c. It may be rendred likewise, also I will bereave them or take a∣way them also, according to the sense in which the Verb to which it is joyned shall be taken, which Verb is Shiccaltim, which having the notion of depriving, or, taking a∣way, as particularly of depriving Parents of Children, or taking from them their Children, and applyed also to Beasts in respect of their young, and to Trees and the Earth in re∣spect of their fruit, and to Countries in re∣spect of their inhabitants; may be used in spea∣king either of the parents, who are deprived and bereaved of their children, d or of the children of which they are bereaved, which are taken from them, and so in a more gene∣ral notion of taking away or destroying, as where it is said Deu. 32.25. The sword with∣out and terrour within 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 teshaccel, shall destroy (as ours there render, and read in the margin, bereave) both the young man and the vir∣gin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs.

In the form that it is herein, it is used bo••h Intransitively to be bereaved, and Transitively, to bereave, or take away; here, manifestly, it is Transitive; for God saith he will do it. But then, to whom shall it be referred? to Parents or Children? to which of them shall the affixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 m i. e. them, agree? It will not be against the Rules of good Construction to refer it to either. And indeed the meaning will be much one whether we say he will bereave, or make childless the Fathers, or he will take their Children away; yet is the Con∣struction mean while different, and gives ce∣casion of different rendrings both of the pre∣sent word, and those that follow, as to their connexion with it. Some therefore refer it to the children. So seem among the Jew∣ish Expositors, (to omit R. Solomo as some∣what d••bious) Aben Ezia and Kimchi to do, as appears by their referring the following word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meadam ab homine, to them also as a Description of their condition, while they render them together, to this purpose, that though they be not cut off from the Birth, the Womb, or the Conception, but have escaped 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 those casualties, and been safe brought up, and continued for a while in life, yet he will take them away, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that they shall not come to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Adam, such as may be called Adam or Man, i. e. as Kimchi more plainly 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they shall dye youths, (or children) they shall not come to that time as to be called Adam; or as Abarbinel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that they shall die be∣fore they come to mans estate, in which all of them follow the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from being (or that they shall not be men, so the Gene∣va English) I will deprive them from being men.

In this way it is supposed that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Adam, doth properly or particularly signify, a man come to those years as that he is by that name distinguished from a child, youth, or boy, and so it is by e some said to do; a∣mong whom Capito reckons the age, at which that name shall agree to them, to be quando in coetum ad lectionem legis audiendam ad∣mittebantur, when they were admitted into the congregation to hear the reading of the Law, Pu∣eri quidem anno tertiodecimo, puellae autem duodecimo, males at thirteen, females at twelve years old. Against this some except as find∣ing

that name common to all of mankind, without distinction of Age or Sex, as mani∣festly children are comprehended under it Jonah 4.11 and therefore they rather think by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meadam, ab hominibus, from men, to be meant f from among men, i. e. so that they shall not longer live or remain among them. And they confirm it by like use of the word, Prov. 30.14. to devour the needy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mea∣dam, from among men, as ours there render it. And if it be so here rendred, yet may the Pronoun them, here, be still referred to the Children, and not to the Fathers, not, I will deprive the fathers from among men, but, I will take away, or destroy the children from a∣mong men. And so the Syriack seems likewise to take it, rendring though they bring up chil∣dren 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will destroy them from men. And so Castalio, rendring quod si suos educaverint natos, eos ex hominibus tollam, but if they shall bring up their children, I will take them away from among men. The MS. Arabick answers precisely to the Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and leaves the mat∣ter as dubious as that. But there be who re∣fer it (viz. the Pronoun spoken of which di∣rects to the meaning of the following word) to the Fathers. So expresly the vulgar La∣tine, absque liberis eos faciam in hominibus, I will make them without children among men, which is all one with what the LXX. have, though with change of the form of the Verb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sine filiis erunt ex ho∣mimbus; and the printed Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 orbabuntur ex hominibus, i. e. they among men shall be without children, viz. shall be so made. I suppose, in hominibus, among men, may well be understood as prae hominibus, more than other men, the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be∣ing often used for prae: and so this Transla∣tion will be justified and confirmed by that expression which we have 1 Sam. 15.3••. when Samuel saith to Agag, as thy sword, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shiccela nashim hath made wo∣men childless, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tishcal min∣nashim immeea shall thy mother be childless a∣mong women. Inter mulieres the vulgar La∣tine, but prae mulieribus, the Interlineary, more than women, which is agreeable to g Kim∣chi's Exposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 more than other women. The use of the word and con∣struction of it wi••h the same Preposition pre∣fixed in that place will justify that Translation which we speak of here, and then it will be a denouncing against them that so gloried in the abundance of Children, that they should now, by those means which God would use for bereaving them of their children, be brought to that pass that they should have fewer to come and live to be a Glory and Comfort to them, than other ordinary men or people had. Which is according to what was in the Law denounced if they should re∣bel against God and fall to Idolatry, that then they who were as the Stars in heaven for multi∣tude, should be left few in number, because they would not obey the voice of the Lord their God, and that as the Lord rejoyced over them to do them good and to multiply them, so he would rejoyce over them, to destroy them and to bring them to nought, and they should be plucked from off the land whither they went to possess h it, Deut. 28.62, 63. Certainly the words here do so imply a great diminution of them, by such means as are expressed. Yet can we not think that it implies an utter and total Destruction of them all, as our Translation would at first sight seem to intimate, rendring, yet will I bereave them that there shall not be a man left, as likewise Jun. and Tremellius orbabo eos ut non supersit ullus. The constru∣ction of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meadam from men, may per∣haps so be justified, but certainly must be warily understood, so as either by an hyper∣bolical way by all to express very many, or the most considerable part, and by not a man, not any considerable number, or persons of any consideration or esteem, so as to be counted a glory to them among men, or else so as by bereaving them to understand not an utter ta∣king them all from among men, but destroy∣ing and taking out of the way by untimely death great part of them, and depriving them as to the rest, of all glory and credit among men, by bringing them into Captivity and an abject condition, such as those that are in, scarce deserve to be reckoned among men, or to make a part of them: for that there were to be left of them a remainder in being, and were, when this judgment was executed and fulfilled upon them, is manifest. And so it was said in the Law after God had threatned to make them few, and to make their land desolate and their cities wast, Lev. 26.23. and that they should perish among the heathen, and the land of their enemies should eat them up, v. 38. that yet for all that, when they should be in the land of their enemies, he would not cast them away nor destroy them utterly, v. 44.

This consideration, I suppose, makes some to understand by that bereaving them threat∣ned, not simply a taking away out of life all their children and offspring, but that it was made good in giving them up to Servitude and Captivity. So Grotius absque liberis••eos faciam in hominibus; I will make them without children among men, that

is, faciam in loca Assyriaci imperii a vehan∣tur, I will cause them to be carried away in∣to places of the Assyrian Empire, and i ano∣ther after him, Tollam cos per praeproperam mortem, au•• exilium, ne amplius inter ho∣mines degant, I will take them away either by hasty death, or by banishment, that they shall no more dwell among men: and Mercer be∣fore them, non quod in exilio Israel si•• caritu∣rus dono foecunditatis; erant enim ad Christ∣um usque mansurae reliquiae, sed quod jace∣bit perpetua servitute oppressus. What is said is spoken, not as if Israel even in their banishment should be deprived of the gift of fruitfulness, for there were a remainder of them to continue until Christ's time, but that they should lie oppressed with perpetual slavery, which condition they that are in may scarce deserve to be reckoned among living men. And with this caution or limitation I suppose ours and like Translations ought to be k understood and mollified while they say there shall not be a man left. For that there should be men of them left, the next words seem to shew, in which there seems to be further judgments, besides these already mentioned, threatned to fall on them after these. There must be then left such on whom they may fall; the words are yea wo also to them when I depart from them.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ci gam, yea also, so ours well ren∣der it, and the vulgar Latin to the same pur∣pose, sed &, &c. but also, and several others, l quinetiam, or m praeterea moreover, n certe surely, others o atque etiam, p others quia etiam, q or nam etiam, for or because also, as the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is the most usual and obvious significa∣tion of those particles, though not the onely one. All these may well enough justify their Translations, nor will they much alter the sense any of them, only that if we take the last, the words will seem to be a reason of what was last before said, that if they brought up their children he would take them away, and so refer the wo to those children, for that they might not think them then out of danger, wo also to them. So Castalio takes it to be, and rendring nam vae etiam illis, for wo also to them, notes in the margin, natis, to their children. Whereas according to the others it may seem rather to be referred to the fathers, or to the whole people; although indeed any way taken it may be referred to either; and so Mercer contrary to Castalio's note which we mentioned, hath wo to them, pa∣tribus nimirum, to wit to the fathers, with∣all adding, alii ad filios referunt, sed ad pa∣tres malo, &c. others refer it to the children, but I think it ought to be referted to the fa∣thers, as if he should say, be would not only deprive them of their children, but of all o∣ther his benefits, and of his favour all toge∣ther. And so Tremellius saith, That it is an addition of the extreme degree of punishment, by which they shall be made sensible of his be∣ing angry not with their children only, but with themselves also, while he declares not only that their children shall be taken away, but the fa∣thers also, who by their wickedness have com∣pelled him to depart from them, and lay them, being destitute of his help and blessing, open all of them to all manner of miseries and a curse; and to them doth R. Solomo refer it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for also, wo the fathers. And so also others refer it to them, or rather to the whole people of them, consisting both of fa∣thers and children, r nam etiam patres ipsi, & sic tota gens excidio damnabitur, For also the fathers themselves and so the whole nation shall be condemned with (or to) destructio••, of all it may well be understood, and so will sound (as Kimchi explains it) that there shall be to them not only that which he had before said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but also in (or on) all their works shall be a curse, so that they shall cry out, Wo to them, s miseria eis ac∣cidet cujus vi exclamabant vae, such misery shall happen to them by force whereof they shall cry out, Wo to us.

The time when this shall be, and so toge∣ther the reason of this wo, or means by which it shall be effected, is expressed in the next words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 besuri mehem, which is by ours rendred, when I depart from them, and by all else that follow the same reading of the Hebrew, to the same purpose, it be∣ing by all taken for granted what the Jewish Masoreth, and their Doctors following them observe that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 besuri, though t written with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sin, is the same as if it were with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 samech from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which sig∣nifies to depart, or go away from. So the Chaldee takes it, explaining it by, when I shall withdraw, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shccinati, my shecinah, my majesty or Divine Presence, or as u others, habitationem meam my residence, Deitatem vel habitationem viz. that I shall no more dwell among them, so the Arabick MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at my depar∣ture, or, when I shall depart from them: the vulgar Latin cum recessero ab eis, and most o∣thers to the same sense. When this Wo shall be brought on them, or when he will depart from them, we need look no further to know, than to that, which is at the beginning of the foregoing v. where he saith, Their glory shall fly away like a bird, which shews that what is

here spoken in pursuance of that, sha•• swift∣ly and speedily come to pass; besides that in several foregoing passages the punishments threatned to them, are spoken of as things near at hand, yea already come to pass, as v. 7. and elsewhere.

How or by what means this Wo shall be brought upon them, what shall cause it, is sufficiently couched, yea emphatically ex∣pressed, in the words depart from them. His saying when I depart from them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in or at my departure from them, intimates and threa∣tens that be will certainly so do; and what is meant by his departing from them, we need not much more to informe us than what we have had from the Chaldee, that it is his withdraw∣ing from them his Divine presence, i. e. all the tokens and manifestations thereof, in his Providence, Care and Protection over them, and his Favour and Loving Kindness to them, shewed in gi••ing them such things as are good for them, and defending them from all hurts and dangers, and in a grecious Ac∣ceptance of their Service, this may be well called his departing from them; his not ma∣nifesting his Presence in such ways to them is as if he were absent from them, who other∣wise filleth all things, is every where present, and cannot be said to depart from place to place, and by punishing them he shewed his power still present, though in respect of his savours withdrawn from them. See more to this p••rpose c. 5. v. 6. and 15. and he say∣ing he will not depart from them, there need no particular causes or means and occasions of Wo to them be named. All the exactest enumeration of any particular calamities or afflictions will come short of this Expression, and be comprehended in it. On Gods hid∣ing his face from men, (an equivalent Ex∣pression to this here) necessarily shall they be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall be∣fall (or, find them) so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us be∣cause our God is not amongst us? So it is said in the Law Deut. 31.17. and may be well w paralelled with this place, wherein for this reason Wo is denounced to them because the Lord will depart from them. Wo to them when he shall so do, Wo to them because he will so do. His Absence necessarily makes way for and imports the presence of all evils which shall befall them in their x Captivity, as his Presence will bring with it all good wherever they shall be.

The Syriack differs from other Translations in the rendring of these last words, while ha∣ving no respect to the prefixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be, in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Besuri which signifies in, and the sense re∣quiring it, is by ours and others rendred when, he translates for wo be to them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 methperano menhun, ultionem sumpturus sum ab eis, I will take vengeance on them. For that is the usual known signification of that word methphera. If it were either 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 methpherek, (from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) pherak I will depart, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 methpheresh, I am separated, it would agree with the origi∣nal Hebrew, and the other translations from it, but seeing the Copies agree in that reading, I shall not go to obtrude any conjecture, concerning it. He might think the meaning well given by that word, inasmuch as Gods departing from them, by reason of the many evils that will necessarily ensue upon it, will be taking Vengeance in an high degree; so that Moses thought the promised Land slow∣ing with milk and honey, without it to be no better then the barren thirsty Desert. So saith he Exod. 33.15. If thy Presence go not with me, carry us not up hence, and see the above cited Deut. 31.17. So that the sub∣straction of that being threatned, there need not be said any more to declare that he will take Vengeance on them, or any peculiar ways of his executing that Vengeance be added.

It is I suppose a needless and scarce con∣venient question y which some here put, why God should here threaten in punishing Is∣rael for their sins to take away those chil∣dren which were not yet come to a capacity of sinning, when it is said, that the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, Ezek. 18.20. Neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers, Deut. 24.16. Besi••es that these Children were conceived in sin, so as from the first Conception to be liable to what is threatned, and besides that God hath de∣clared that he would visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate him, Exo. 20.5. Deut. 5.9. And besides also that this, while a great punishment to the fathers, might yet be a mercy to the children preven∣ting, and taking them away from, the great evils which if they had lived they might have done or suffered? I think the most conveni∣ent answer may be returned in that known Rule of the Jewish Doctors, z 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That men ought not too cu∣riously to enquire after, or to call in question or demand a reason of the doings of God, it be∣ing necessary to be granted that they are all just, and such as he hath just reason for.

As for, why God would in that manner punish them, Abarbinel gives as a reason, that it was because of their great Exorbitan∣cy in the sin of Fornication, for which this

was a a proper and proportionable Punish∣ment, and seems to think this Punishment a proof that this was the sin for which they were here more particularly taxed and threat∣ned. The Chaldee Paraphrast gives the rea∣son in more general terms, thus rendring in v. 11. They shall not multiply children and shall not rejoyce for the fruit of their bowels, be∣cause they have refrained their feet from appea∣ring in my Sanctuary, so hath he instead of from the birth, and from the womb and from the con∣ception.

Whereas others look on these words as a de∣claration of what God would do to them for punishment; R. Solomo takes them in one way that he bringeth, as a wish or desire of the Prophet that they might be so dealt with, his words sounding to this purpose, The Pro∣phet saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I would they might be as this bird which wandreth from her nest, and ceaseth from fructification and multiplication; so let them be deprived of their seed either at the time of birth, or let it be digested or consumed in the womb so that they become abortive, or let them not retain it in the time of conception. For what will it profit them to bring up their children, see∣ing if they bring them up, I will bereave them from being men, for wo also to the fathers when I shall depart from them. b Some following him in this way render in the Imperative mood what others do in the Indicative, Ephraim sicut avis sit, avolet gloria, Let Ephraim be as a bird, let her glory fly away, &c. But that Rabbin gives also another way, not much distant from some that we had before, As a bird that fleeth away, and disappeareth, so shall all the glory of Ephraim fly away, what∣soever they have suffered as to bringing forth, bearing, or conceiving, shall all come to nothing, seeing when they shall have brought up their chil∣dren, God will bereave them.

What we have spoken for Explication of these words taketh for granted that to be the true reading which the Hebrew hath, and other Translations which follow that, give us; but there is a far different reading of the words, by others insisted on, about which no small stir is kept, viz. that of the Greek, both the LXX. and Theodotion, the reading which we have being, Yea wo also to them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Besuri, when I depart, or, in, (or at) my departing from them, they have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because wo is to them, my flesh is of them; which the printed Arabick also following hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because wo is to them, my body is of them. This S. Jerom takes notice of, but without doubting that the Hebrew, as we now have it, is right. But Lyra is so fond of this reading as that he would have that to be the right, and the Hebrew to be corrupted, and boldly affirms that this is unus de passibus Scripturae veteris testamenti qui est corruptus à Judaeis, one of the passages of t••e Scripture of the old Testament which was cor∣rupted by the Jews. For proof of which he takes in the Authority of Raimundus (whose Book was not then printed, but since is. He indeed v speaks of it in his Book called Pugio fidei the 3^d. Part c. 4.11. and c. 21.1. The corruption that they imagine to be is, that whereas it should be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 befri, which signifies my flesh, or perhaps x 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bissuri, my Incarnation, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 basar which is flesh, the Jews now read besuri, and will have it to signify the same as if it were written with the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 samech 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 besuri, (for the sound is still the same) from the root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sur to depart, to go away or aside from, their intention being as they think, hereby to elude a manifest proof of Christs Incarnation. Ribera is large in contradicting Lyranus in this, and proving the reading in the Hebrew, and the rendring of the vulgar Latin to be right. I shall not at large transcribe what he saith, but only observe some things which he saith as the grounds on which he goeth; as first that the Hebrew Copies in S. Jerom's time were un∣corrupted, as out of him and Austin he prov∣es as likewise in Origen's time, whereas Lyra to make good his opinion affirms that they were corrupted before the Latin Trans∣lation was made. But then he goes antien∣ter to Jonathans the Chaldee paraphrasts time, who cannot be doubted to have had a true copy, and read it as we now do. Secondly, that by the consent of all the Greek Translation is multis in locis vitiata, in many places corrupted. 3^ly. He brings an argu∣ment to prove that this cannot be spoken of Christ, if it did so sound; because they are the ten Tribes that are here spoken of, and Christ was according to the flesh not to be of them, but of the Tribe of Judah: in which argument several concur with him, as ma∣nifestly proving that the corruption of this place, if it were corrupted, would nothing advantage the Jews for denying the Incarna∣tion of our Lord Christ, and this I suppose Lyranus would have to be a Prophecy of the Jews and their destruction by the Romans, (by a strange abruptness) inserted in the midst of his speaking of such Judgments as should befall the other Tribes. But who may grant him this on so sleight grounds? This being observed let me add another reason, why if the Jews had had will and opportunity of corrupting the sacred Text (which I think they never had) yet it cannot be probable y

that they would have so perverted this place with great disadvantage to themselves: for certainly to read it so as these men would have it, as it could be for no advantage to Chri∣stians in proving the Incarnation of Christ, for the reason forementioned, so would it be for great advantage to the Jews in affording them an argument of greater force than any they have, for confirmation of that fond Opi∣nion of theirs concerning b a Messias that should be the son of Joseph of the Tribe of Ephraim, which they vainly expect. If the Translation of the LXX. were not so ancient as it is, it might be thought that this rendring was framed out of design and favour to them in that behalf, and it may almost be suspected that they from a sight of that reading might take up that Opinion. Therefore, I think, we may not only say with Petrus à Figuiero, that that reading non videtur tanti facienda quanti faciunt quidam, ought not to be made so much of as by some it is, but that it is such as ought to be bewared of.

V. 13. Ephraim, as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place: but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer.

Ephraim as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place, &c. In this v. he proceeds in asserting the certainty of those Judgements, decreed against Israel, and to shew that how∣ever, as things were or had hitherto been with them, they might think that there were no great probability of their falling on them, yet that certainly they should. That we may the better judge of such Rendrings and Interpretations of the words as we meet with, it may seem convenient to set down, in the first place, the words as they literally sound in the Original, in which they are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which with∣out addition or alteration for making the fense more clear in translating them into o∣ther Languages, literally sound, Ephraim as I saw to Tyrus, planted in an habitation, and Ephraim to bring forth his sons to the slayer; which so rendred make not in ours, and other Languages, any perspicuous meaning, as particularly what he saith, as I saw to Tyrus, which according to the most frequent use of taking the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l as a note of the Dative case, will so be properly rendred, to. To mollify and make more plain the mean∣ing here, different ways are taken; some, that it may hold that signification, under∣standing something before it which may im∣port likeness as that it may be, is like to Tyrus. And for this end c some will have that letter spoken of to be instead of, or in the signification of, the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 C denoting as, or being a note of similitude, is as Tyrus, or, d like Tyrus or else to be redundant, so that no regard is to be had of the signification of it, but the words to sound, e is Tyrus, i. e. also, as Tyrus, or it to be taken for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Eth, a note only of the Accusative case, and so to be also omitted in the Translation. So the MS. Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and with these ours agree, as I saw Tyrus, and in that way f some double the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I have seen, (or see Ephraim) as I see Tyrus. g Others render it in, in Tyro, as I have seen in Tyrus. These meanwhile, and the like, concur in this that the words are a Comparison of Eph∣raim with Tyrus in respect of what is af∣ter expressed; which being taken for the scope of them, I think the letter or prefixe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 le may be well taken, without more ado about it, in its proper signification of to, and so the words reduced into plainer Language will sound to the same purpose, sicut vi∣dresse Tyro, as I saw (or see) it to be to i. e. with Tyrus. Then, that for which they are paralelled or likened, Ephraim to Tyrus, follows in the next words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shetulah benaveh, planted in a pleasant place: which words ours taking them as referred to Ephraim and describing it, supply is, is planted, and so do g divers others. h Others refer it to Tyrus as a description of her situ∣ation, as Tyrus which is planted, &c. The i syntaxe equally admits of either; and the sense is still the same, it being all one to say that Ephraim being so planted is like to Ty∣rus, or, is like to Tyrus which is so planted, it will import that each of them was so plant∣ed, and in that like one another. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shetulah, planted: the word though properly belonging to a tree or plant that is set or plan∣ted, yet is transferred to denote k a firm settling or placing of other things also, as of persons, Psal. 92.13 Those that be planted in the house of the Lord, and here of the People, or Kingdom, or City which is said to be planted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 benaveh which ours render in a pleasant place, i others in amoeno habitaculo, in a pleasant habitation, m the vulgar Latin, in pulchritudine, in beauty as the Doway English it; n others in amoenitate or amoeno, in

pleasantness, o or amoeniter pleasantly, others simply, in p habitaculo in a (or its) habitation, the reason of which is the likeness between the two roots 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 naah, which signifies, to be beautiful or pleasant and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 navah, to remain, or inhabit. Some therefore though the word naveh, here seem to be from the second, yet think it to have the signification of the first, and in that regard render it not simply a place or habitation, but according to the quality of that place, a pleasant or beautiful place, the others give it only the simple notion of the second. The difference betwixt them will seem to be this, that one sets forth the Beau∣ty and Pleasantness, the other the Strength and Firmness of its Situation; and the circum∣stances and scope of the place, here, do in∣deed seem to require both, that so Ephraim may be compared to Tyrus as situated and firm∣ly placed in a very commodious place, both pleasant and strongly fortified. How aptly both these agree to Tyrus, that then famous City, appears as by other Authors, so by what the Scripture saith of it, as particularly q Ezek. the 27. and 28. chapters, in which her Riches, her Glory, her Pleasantness, Beauty and Strength, and her Pride thereup∣on, are in several passages described. Ephraim then while in such regards like unto her, might perhaps, and its too manifest did, grow insolent, as secure and confident that no such evils as were threatned by the Prophet, should befall her: but how much she in that deceived her self, and how vain all such con∣fidence was, the next words will then shew in that he saith, but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ve Ephraim, and Ephraim. But to render by but, the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ve, which most usually signifies and, as it is not unusual in other places, so here seems apposite, and it is by others also so rendred, r sed, but, or to the same purpose s & tamen yet notwithstanding, so as to give this meaning, that though by reason of her present Jollity and plentiful en∣joyment of all things and her confidence in her Strength she was secure and feared no∣thing that was threatned to her, yet certainly this Mischief and misery should befall her, that she should bring forth her children to the murderer, i. e. t either in battel against the enemy by whom they should be slain, or else u to deliver them up to the conque∣ring enemy, who should demand them that he might slay them before their eyes: The word rendred shall bring forth, is in the o∣riginal 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lehotsi ad educendum; but it will be necessarily understood either as ours render it, or to like purpose, is to bring forth, w educturus est, x or producturus est supplying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ready as to the f••∣ture, or as z some, cogetur educere, shall be forced to bring forth, or as others, a E∣phraim vidi educere, I have seen Ephraim to bring forth, supplying (vidi) I have seen. All these will concur in the notion of the words and meaning, such meaning as we might well acquiesce in, yet because there are o∣thers who differ in some things, some more some less, it will be convenient to take no∣tice of some at least of them, because the Authors thereof perhaps had seen this, yet preferred their own, and the Reader would willingly have his liberty of choice also.

First then, we shall take notice as near∣est home, of a different English Translation, viz. that called the Geneva, in which the Verse is thus rendred, Eph••aim as I saw, is as a tree in Tyrus, planted in a cottage, and in the Margine is added this no••e, As they kept tender plants in their houses in Tyrus, to preserve them from the cold air of the sea, so was Ephraim at the first, unto me, but now I will give him to the slaughter. In this they seem to follow Calvin who hath the same Rendring and Exposition: the ground perhaps to the Author of this Intepretation might be because the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shetu∣lah, planted, in its proper signification belongs to a Tree or Plant, and therefore they sup∣ply the word, tree; they differ we see from our now received and approved Translati∣on, and those others which we have men∣tioned, in that whereas they all take E∣phraim to be compared to Tyrus it self, these take it to be likened to a Tree in Tyrus, there carefully preserved from wind and weather, that it might prosper and flourish; and they translate therefore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 letsur, in Tyrus. b Another Learned Man agreeing with them also in this that he takes a Tree here to be understood, translates it prope Tyrum, near to Tyrus, and in his Expositi∣on goes almost contrary to them, as if the comparison were not to set forth the flou∣rishing Condition which they were, or had been, in, but their fading and perishing Con∣dition, like that of a fair Tree, which be∣ing transported into the Soyl of Tyrus, ob salsuginem ejus loci sensim infecta deflaccescit ac perit, by reason of the saltness of that place, standing upon the sea, being by little and little corrupted, fades and perisheth; so they, how∣ever before they had flourished and pros∣pered, should now by bringing out their children, their young men to be murdered y

by the Assyrian enemy, should decay. I shall not make comparison betwixt these two so far different Expositions, but in respect to both, I think there being no express mention of a Tree made in the Text, we have c no reason to put it in, but rather to think Tyrus it self is that to which Ephraim is compared. So it is, as by those that we have already seen, so by divers others also, who as to the other circumstances of the comparison much differ from them. Such are those, in the next place, who take the comparison to be made not only in respect to the Prosperity which they both sometime enjoyed, but in respect to the Calamities which after befell them both. Such is that Exposition of Aben Ezra which is, Ephraim shall be as Tyrus which was planted in an habitation, and the waters covered it, so have I seen in prophetical vision that the father, (viz. in Ephraim) shall bring forth his children to the murderer. And the very same hath Kimchi in more words, I have seen (or see) Ephraim in great prosperity, as I have seen (or see) Tyrus planted by the sea in a good habi∣tation, and afterwards the waters covered her, so I see Ephraim that he bringeth forth his chil∣dren to the murderer, because the enemies shall come up against them, and they shall go out of their cities to meet them in battel, and their ene∣mies shall slay them. But besides what Abarbi∣nel excepts, that there is no similitude betwixt being covered with waters, and the bringing forth their children to be slain, what Deluge of waters was that which overwhelmed Ty∣rus? d Perhaps they have respect to what is said, Ezek. 26.19. which it is said was ful∣filled by its being drowned with waters, or part of it, as Grotius thinks; but however that is to be understood, for all do not un∣derstand it literally, it seems done after what happened to Ephraim.

Others cited by R. Tanchum make in much like manner the comparison; they, he saith, take these and the following words to be by way of Imprecation by the Prophet a∣gainst them, uttered in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 such language as the present state of things did (as it were) dictate, as done, though a declaration of what should be after to them, and Ephraim put in the first place to be the Vocative case, O Ephraim, and then the order of the mean∣ing of the following words to be, As I saw it to Tyrus, i. e. to have been with, or happen∣ed to Tyrus, which was planted or firmly seat∣ed in her habitation, so do I see it to be, (or that it shall happen) to Ephraim, that he shall bring forth his children to the murderer. But this Exposition he excepts against, because Tyrus was destroyed after the destruction of Ephraim, as appears by the Prophecy of Eze∣kiel against her. He himself therefore brings another different from it, which is, that what is here said is a declaration of two things to∣gether, as if he said, I perceive and see the condition of Ephraim, to be as the condition of Tyrus in respect of the issue of what shall befall them, but that Ephraim 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is first, for that he hath already brought forth his children to the murderer, so that the ordering and supplying the words for construction will be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I have seen it to be (or to fall out) to Ephraim as I have seen it to be (or, to fall out) to Tyrus. To make the for∣mer less harsh, and reconcile it with what he saith, may perhaps be said that they did not look on what is said of Tyrus as what was actually performed, but being foreseen by the Prophet as certainly decreed, is spoken of by him as what was already done. Still all these agree in that they think Ephraim compared to Tyrus in something wherein they were like. And so the Chaldee Paraphrast before them which hath it, The congregation of Israel while they observed the Law, was like to Tyrus in Prosperity and Security, they of the house of Ephraim have sinned, so as to slay their children for the service of Idols. He agrees, we see, in that which we mentioned viz. in that he takes a Comparison to be made be∣twixt Ephraim and Tyrus, viz. in regard to the Flourishing Condition of both; al∣though in other things he go wide from what the words seem to import, and by others are taken to do. And first he seems to take no notice of the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 caasher raiti, which are as we have seen by ours translated, and by most others to e like pur∣pose, if not in the very same Expression, As I saw, except we look on Diodati as some∣thing differing, while he renders it, Ephraim, while I looked upon him (or had regard to him) was like to Tyrus, planted, &c. which as to the sense will almost fall in with the Chaldce, inasmuch as so long as men have regard to Gods Law, he useth to have regard to them. But (as we said) the Chaldee doth not other∣wise express those Words as to the Letter, but instead of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 while they performed the Law, and then supplies, was like, but then in Paraphrasing those words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 el horeg, to the murderer, goes far different from the others which we have seen, understanding it not of their bring∣ing forth their children to be slain of the Enemy, but of their own slaying them in f sacrifice to their Idols as if in this also they

were like to Tyrus, in that as the Tyrians sacrificed their children to Idols, so the E∣phramites also did. R. Solomo Jarchi in this follows him, giving his Exposition to this purpose, As I see Tyrus in its prosperity crown∣ed above all cities, so see I it to be with E∣phraim planted in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 naveh (a pleasant place, but what recompense doth Ephraim return to me? He busieth himself to bring forth his children to the murderer, to sacrifice them to Idols. But Abarbi∣nel likes not this nor those other expositions of the former Jews, thinking them to be all out in saying that Ephraim is here compared to Ty∣rus for any thing in which they were alike, but that the intent of the words is on the contrary to shew a disparity betwixt them, out of consideration of which he breaks forth into the following words, of which he makes the meaning to be, When I see as to Tyrus, which is near to Jerusalem a city of the Philistines, that it is planted in a pleasant mansion and seat∣ed in Beauty, Secure, Prosperous, and Quiet, without Adversary, without ill accident; and (as to) Ephraim on the contrary I see, that he doth all day long (or every day) bring forth his children to the murderer, because every day the children of Ephraim go forth to battel, and are there slain, seeing, (I say) the matter is so, give them, O Lord, what thou wilt give them, &c. Montanus plainly following him, (though he name him not) in this Interpretation, will have the first Ephraim to be in the Vocative case, as in a pathetical Expression, O Israel, (for Abarbinel himself takes no notice of it, it may be taking it as only as importing, As for Ephraim.) This Exposition might perhaps be inforced, if the words were read Interroga∣tively, Shall Ephraim, whereas I see it to be so and so with Tyrus, which is not of Gods Israel as to her great Prosperity, Shall, I say, Ephraim bring forth her children to be slaughter∣ed? O rather give them a miscarrying womb, &c. And indeed I think an Interrogation might not ill agree with the first Meaning which we mentioned, but would add passion of Admi∣ration to it, thus, Ephraim, as I see Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place, he is in a Flou∣rishing, Prosperous, Settled, Secure condition, rooted as a Tree, and shall Ephraim bring forth his Children to the murderer? And then (these being looked on all as the Prophets words) the next will follow in plain Connexion, rather than it shall be so, give them, O Lord. It would be almost the same, if the former part of the verse were looked on as the Pro∣phets words, in the person of one that should object against the Probability of the Judge∣ments before threatned falling on them, whom he saw as securely placed as Tyrus it self, and the latter as a Reply, as in the Person of God, Ephraim (notwithstanding they seem so se∣cure) shall certainly bring forth his children, &c.

Still in all these wayes what ever diffe∣rence be otherwise, yet is the present Read∣ing of the Hebrew followed, and Tyrus ta∣ken for a proper Name of a city, which is to be observed, because if we look to the LXX. we shall find a far different Reading, and so consequently, Meaning. For in them is no mention of the name of Tyrus at all, but instead of those words which we have seen translated by ours, Ephraim as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a fair place, these 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the printed Arabick follows rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim, as I saw, have yielded (or brought) their children to hunting, i. e. to be hunted, or taken, in venationem sive capturam, as Jerom; who noteth the occasion of their so rendring to be that they took the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 r for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d, and instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsor, which is Tyrus, did read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tsod, which would signify hunting. What meaning the words so read, would make we shall not en∣quire, seeing it goes not on a sure ground, as neither what Cappel. thinks that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shetulah planted, they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shatu lah, in two words, posuerunt ei, and beneha for benaveh.

The same Jerome observes that other Greek Interpreters as Aquila, Symmachus, and Theo∣dotion read it as it is now read in the He∣brew, but took it not for the proper name of a city, but in that signification which it hath otherwise, of a rock, or flint-stone, f as if he said, Ephraim as I saw, is planted as on a firm rock in his mansion, yet shall be forced to bring forth his children to the murderer. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tsor likewise may have the no∣tion of besieging, and from that also do g some offer an interpretation, to this purpose, E∣phraim as I see by the spirit of prophecy, ad ob∣sidionem plantata est in habitaculo suo, & ipse educet filios suos, &c. is planted for a siege in his mansion, and he shall bring forth his children to the slayer. But sure our plain∣est and safest way will be to go with those many both ancient and modern, who take it for the proper name of the city Tyrus, to whom we may add also the ancient Syriack Version, though seeming otherwise some∣thing differing in the sense from any other which we have seen, except it come near to what we have seen from Abarbinel, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Latine Translatour of it renders, Aphrem quemadmodum vidisti Tyrum consi∣tum aedificiis suis, ita Aphrem producet filios sues ad necem, Ephraim as thou hast seen

(read rather Chazit) I have seen, Tyrus planted in (or with) its buildings, so shall Ephraim bring forth his children to the slaughter.

Why Tyrus should here rather be named than any other place, for Ephraim to be com∣pared to, although it will not be needful to enquire, God having directed the Prophet so to do, yet there may be reasons apparent for it; as because it was h neighbouring to, or bor∣dering on, some of their Tribes, and so well known to them; and then again, i because such was the condition of it, as that the flourishing Estate, the Wealth and Glory, the Strength and Security, of any People could not be better set forth than by comparing them to it, and it may not be improbable that about that time there might happen something concern∣ing Tyrus which might give occasion of this naming it, and likening Ephraim to it, which being not Expressed in the History of Scripture, may make the words not so well now understood, as they were then when they were spoken. If it were any thing of ill or mischief, as we have seen some to think, it can∣not be certainly understood of what mischief was brought on them, either by Nebuchad∣nezar, or by Alexander the Great, but in a Prophetical way, speaking of what was by God certainly determined, as already done, as R. Tanchum seems to take it, in regard that what is here threatned to Ephraim, was performed before either of those calamities were brought on her; yea some think before that k which by Salmaneser was done to them, though that amounted not to that which might make their calamity to be compared to Ephraims. Amongst the Expositions there∣fore which we have seen, that in the first place mentioned, and agreeing with our Translati∣on, we may well rest satisfied with, though the Reader hath his free choice, and the liber∣ty of his own Judgement. However the for∣mer words be understood, we have in the lat∣ter a denounciation of such evils to Ephraim as give occasion to that seemingly abrupt and passionate Expression in the next Verse.

V. 14. Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscar∣rying womb, and dry breasts.

Give them, O Lord, what wilt thou give, &c. The effect of what was before v. 11. denoun∣ced as a punishment to them, seems here desi∣red or prayed for by the Prophet. It was there threatned, that the Glory of Israel should speedily fly away from the Birth, and from the Womb, and from the Conception: and certainly if God give them a miscarrying Womb and dry Breasts, that must necessarily be brought to pass; as by considering the words in which both are expressed, and lay∣ing them together, both what is there threat∣ned, and here desired, plainly appears. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rechem masheil; Of the signification of the Root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shacal, something hath been above spoken; on v. 12. The word here thence derived and applied to the Womb, is l looked upon either so as to signify depriving, or deprived, i. e. either that makes abortion, or, casteth the fruit (as ours in the margin) not bringing it to maturity or timely birth, or else is Barren and conceives no Fruit at all. And some therefore render it one way, some another, either abortientem, or orbam, sterilem, as some ancient Translations seem rather to sound, as the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the vulgar Latine, Vulvam sine liberis, a womb without children, and the printed Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Latine translatour renders uterum non generantem, a womb that beareth not, and the MS. Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(although that may be either, orbans or orba, miscarrying, or barren) the Syriack) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 marbeo magazyo, uterum sterilem, as also Castalio renders it, but the other abortien∣tem, making abortion, or miscarrying is as by most of the modern, as well as by ours followed, so by the Jewish Expositors also, as by the Chaldee before them. So by R. Solomo who looks on it as a wish that their children should die, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at the very time or instant, that they come out into the light of the world, R. Aben Ezra 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that they should die in the womb. Kimchi also in the same words, adding that the womb hath the epithet of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 depriving or bereaving 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as if the womb did bercave of them because they are bereaved, or taken away in the womb. Abar∣binel saith his wish to be that the women should make abortion of their children, that they should not come to the birth. R. Tanc. to much the same purpose 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that maketh abortive the children and corrupt∣eth them. Yet Abuwalid saith that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mashcil, miscarrying, here is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Par∣ticiple active or agent, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an epi∣thet or adjective, signifying 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 orbi∣tatem habens. Either of these will come to the same pass, as for bringing to effect that punishment of failure of multiplying chil∣dren, which was their former glory.

To the same end tends what is joyned, and dry breasts. So most Jews and Christians, ma∣king no doubt of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 tzemuk∣im, which is that which they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, m

yebashim which so signifies, and so the Chal∣dee renders it. Junius and Tremellius flac∣cida, flagging breasts as the MS. Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lean, thinne, flagging, meaning I sup∣pose the same thing, viz. want of milk, the import of which the most of Expositors con∣sent to be, that if there be children conceiv∣ed and brought forth, yet they should quick∣ly dy for want of sustenance, their mothers having no milk in their breasts to nourish them withall. Yet others understand it some∣thing otherwise. Abarbinel seems to look on it as denoting that they should not at all conceive, till which time usually the breasts are not filled with milk; and not much un∣like, Grotius who expounds it, non sint ulli quos lactent infantes, let there be no children to whom they may give milk. This more punctu∣ally agrees with what is v. 11. and from the conception. No great difference, either as to the signification or meaning of the words, will any of these little varieties make. But there are some other differences betwixt In∣terpreters concerning them, as first in respect of the reading in the first part of the verse. 2^dly. In respect to the Prophets intention in uttering them.

1. As to the Reading, in that some after the first words by way of Petition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ten lahem Jehovah, (or Adonai) give them, O Lord, there making a pause, read the next 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mah titten, with an Interrogation, what wilt thou give them? as if he seeing how greatly they had sinned, and what great cala∣mities God had justly denounced to them for it, n were in doubt what to ask, or what he might presume to ask, and as if he did ask counsel of God in it, and then recollect∣ing himself asked what follows. This read∣ing diverse both of the ancient and o modern translations follow. So the LXX. and the printed Arabick following them, the MS. also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and what thing wilt thou give them? and Tremellius thinks the accent tiphcah to require that the words are so to be distinguished, and our Translators go this way. Yet do others likewise both ancient and p modern also, taking all these words as one clause, read them without an Interroga∣tion, as the Chaldee (of whom more by and by) The ancient Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Give them, Lord, what (or that which) thou wilt give them, i. e. that which thou hast threatned and denounced to them, viz. that which in the following words he summs up. And this way take Aben Ezra and Kimchi and Abarbinel whose words are, his meaning is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Give them, O Lord God, what thou wilt hereafter give them.

2^dly. As for the intention of the Prophet in this Prayer, whether it be for ill or for good to them, is also difference of opinions. It is by diverse looked upon as an impreca∣tion or wish of evil to them, by the Prophet q approving Gods counsel before declared concerning them, with great passion uttered out of indignation to their obstinate rebelli∣ons against them, from which they would by no means be reclaimed, but continued to propagate them to their posterity also, and out of zeal to his glory. If it be objected that certainly there could not be in the holy Prophet so little charity as to wish so great mischief to his brethren his kinsmen accord∣ing to the flesh, (for whom St. Paul could even wish himself accursed Rom. 9.3) that the whole race of them should be cut off, as if that which he seems to desire were brought to pass, it would necessarily be; r answers are given, that though he had never so much kindness for them, as probably he had much, yet s Gods glory, which as by them, so by those that should be educated and instructed by them would still be violated and set at nought, ought to be more regarded by him than any good to them, and to be sought t though by their destruction, seeing there was no other way to preserve and advance it. Again that by his vocation as a u Prophet and his special commission which he ought to obey, he was obliged to do it, though o∣therwise seeming contrary to the general law of charity, which he could not in this case observe without thwarting his particu∣lar commission and neglecting his duty to God, and respect to his glory. This way is by many followed, as by the Chaldee para∣phrast who thus gives the meaning, Give them, O Lord, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the reward of their doings. So by Jerome, who expounds it as a prayer that seeing they gloried in the multitude of their children, and despised God, he would so deprive them of them. So say Cyril, Theodoret and Theophylact and (saith Chr. à Castro) omnes alii, but too large∣ly, as we shall after see. And the words be∣ing so understood, may here also be well ob∣served that Rule which on Micah 7.14. we gave out of a Jewish translator of w the Psalms, That such imprecations from holy men and prophets as occurr in Scripture against any,

are not properly x curses y or prayers against them, but rather z prophetical declarations of what God hath determined concerning them, which he directs them to utter by way of petition. Which also St. Austin observes, (cited by Dr. Ham∣mond) saying, Haec non optando sunt dicta, sed, optandi specie, prophetando, These things are not spoken by way of wishing, but un∣der the shew of wishing, by prophecy. b And some think it evident here from the expression, that it is propheticè dictum, ac si diceret, dabis eis vulvam sine liberis, prophetically spoken, as if he should say, Thou wilt give them a womb that shall not bear children.

Yet do others say to the contrary; non est prophetia aut praedictio futuri, it is not a pro∣phecy or prediction of what should come, (saith Capito) for it is not read that Israel was puni∣shed with such sterility, but, by the general con∣sent of the prophets, shewed that they were pu∣nished by famine and sword. And c another, that the prophet having before foretold that God would deprive them, from the womb and from the conception, it was not probable that he should here repeat in obscurer termes, what was before in plainer declared. These therefore, as many others look on this desire of the Prophet as proceeding from his chari∣ty to, and d great commiseration of that peo∣ple, seeing that God had peremptorily decre∣ed to send his severe judgements on this ob∣stinately wicked people, and had declared in what wayes he would punish them, he hav∣ing compassion on them, yet greater zeal to Gods glory, seeing without injury to Gods justice he could not pray that God would leave them altogether unpunished, yet be∣cause God in wrath useth to remember mercy, (as Hab. 3.2.) takes upon him thus far to in∣tercede for them, that seeing there is no re∣medy but that they must be punished, he would punish them in the mildest way a∣mongst those which he had determined. They were before named, that either he would destroy their offspring, from the birth and from the womb, or from the conception, as soon as they were born, or before they were born, or by hindring their women from con∣ceiving at all, or else he would bereave them of them after they had brought them up, and cause them to bring them forth to the murderer to be slain before their eyes, by the cruel enemy; he looking on the latter way as the much more grievous and calamitous, desires that God would so far have mercy on them as to satisfy his justice by taking them away in the former, and not to reserve them to this latter so much more intolerable.

This way of exposition follow the Jewish ex∣positors. R. Solomo saith,

The Prophet pray∣eth that they should die being yet infants, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because the grief for an infant is not like the grief for one grown up to more age, &c.

Aben Ezra The prophet prayeth,

Seeing thou hast decreed concerning them, that they shall every one of them bring out their children to the murderer, let them rather die infants, and let not their affliction be great.

R. Kimchi also,

The prophet foreseeing that they should bring forth their children to the murderer, prays for them and saith, Give them, O Lord, what thou wilt give them, viz. of the destruction of their children in the womb, or while they are yet infants, and let them not fall by the hand of the enemy.

Abarbinel to the same purpose,

That the prophet prays that God would give to them that death and deprivation of children, not after they were grown up, no nor after their birth, but in those two other wayes which he said, viz. from the womb and from the conception, that there should be to them an abortive womb, their women miscarrying and not being able to bring to the birth, or that they should not at all conceive;

which he looks on as signified by dry breasts, as barren women have, and therefore the result to be, that it would be better for them that their children should die from the womb and from the conception, than that they should come to the birth, much more than that they should grow up to age, seeing their end would be for evil and not for good, as to the men of Tyrus. And this way follow al∣so several Latine and e other modern Expo∣sitors. Yet Christophorus à Castro, saith of the former way that it is generally received f by all, but of this latter, solus Montanus, only Arias Montanus gave it, perhaps he was the first in the Romish Church that took it from Abarbinel whom in many things he followeth, and other Jewes, and gave it a∣mong the Latins; but sure, so many have em∣braced it that it will be hard to say which is followed by the most. This latter g may be so taken as not to exclude the former, but so as to comprehend both his zeal for Gods glory, and his charity to Israel, as if at once he made it his petition that God would glo∣rify himself both by executing justice on them whose sins were such as did not admit of absolute pardon, and by shewing mercy a

in the mitigation of his severity, on them to whom he could not but wish well to, and have charity for, though they had none for themselves. The first, in it self, sheweth the greatness of their sins, which was such as that the charitable Prophet seeing it in vain to pray for their amendment who were so ob∣stinate in their ways, and like to bring up their posterity in the same, doth not presume to ask that God would quite forgive them; the second, the greatness of the h miseries that he saw would befall them, in that he seeth it to be charity to pray for that as a blessing, viz. barenness and failure of chil∣dren, which was looked on as, and was cer∣tainly in it self, a very great curse, as if the times that were then to befall them were like to be such, as those which were after∣wards foretold of to the Jews by our Savi∣our, saying, Behold the dayes are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck, Luk. 23.29. where that great unhappiness is acknowledged, in respect to greater evils, for a blessing, which by the prophet here in the same respect is prayed for as such. What questions are here i by some started concerning the nature of this prayer of the prophet, as how far he prayed in faith, and whether with a full de∣liberate desire and confidence of obtaining, and how far he obtained, and how far he might pray against that which he knew to be the determinate counsel of God, or the like, it will not be to our purpose to insist on, it making nothing to the meaning of the words, the giving of which is our main scope. They that have occasion of such questions may make use of the words as far as they will bear, or they see to be to the purpose.

V. 15. All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for the wickedness of their do∣ings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters.

All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them, &c. These words may seem a k reply from God, upon the prophets peti∣tion, shewing that his decreed judgments should not be taken off in any part, from them, and that by reason of their great pro∣vocations and ill deserts. The first words being in the Original only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all their wickedness in Gilgal, do, to make a full sense necessarily require some Verb to be supplied or understood; and ours with most others supply the verb is (or fuit was.) Rab∣bi Tanchum supplies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ezcor, I will remember, or I remember, call to mind, or will make them know that I took notice of and do not forget; agreeable to the Chaldee, all their wickednesses, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were manifest be∣fore me in Gilgal. For to remember them, what is it with God but to make them know that he knew and took notice of them?

But before we insist on the meaning of what is affirmed, it will be convenient to take into consideration both the place here named, and such things as are recorded to have been done in it, so shall we the better discerne in respect to what their ill doings there are here mentioned as occasions of Gods pro∣ceeding so severely, as he now threatens, with them. In the 4^th c. of this prophecy v. 15. we have it mentioned, and on that place have spoken something of the name of the place, and its situation, which it will not be necessary here to repeat. Among such things and transactions as the Scripture men∣tions to have been there done, these it may for the explication of these words, not be amiss to take notice of; as first, that after the Israelites had passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan, they (as it is Josh. 4.18, &c.) there first encamped and pitched the taber∣nacle wherein was the ark of the covenant, and set up the twelve stones which by the com∣mand of God they took out of Jordan, to be a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever, l of such wonders as God had done for them in cutting of the waters of that then over∣flowing river to make a passage for them, and that there they were circumcised, seeing that while they walked fourty years in the wilderness they had omitted that Sacrament, and so rolled the reproch of Egypt from off them, and repeated their covenant with God, Josh. 5.2, &c. and that there they kept also the passover, and there began to eat of the corn of the land that God had given them, and to enjoy the fruits thereof, as fully possessed of it, v. 10, 11, 12. and there appeared to Joshua, the captain of the Lords host, to encou∣rage him and commanded him to loose his shoe from off his foot, for that the place on which he stood was holy, v. 15. and that that place was chosen to offer sacrifices in to the Lord, 1 Sam. 10.8. and 11.15. 2ly. Besides, what R. Tanchum observes, that the sin of Achan, which brought a curse upon the whole peo∣ple, was committed there, or while they were there, the history tells us that when they rejecting the Lord and Samuel would

needs change their government and have a King, they did there establish Saul to rule over them, 1 Sam. 11.15. 3^dly. that Gilgal, as appears out of this prophet, here, and above c. 4.15. where they are forbid to go to it, and c. 12.12. where it is said, They sacrifice bullocks in Gilgal, and Amos 4.4. and 5.5. was a place infamous for the much Idola∣try there committed. It was a city, saith Cyril, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, wherein Idols the work of mens hands were excessively and strangely su∣perstitiously worshipped, where maxime erant impii, they were most impious, as Theophy∣lact. It is probable that they did choose there to exercise their Idolatry because they were m perswaded by their false pro∣phets, or themselves thought, that that place wherein, formerly, such tokens of Gods fa∣vour had been shewed to them was neces∣sarily still an holy place, and wherein they should alwayes be accepted.

These things being observed it may now be enquired in respect to which of these things, what is here said is spoken. In respect to the first, it cannot probably be said, seeing what things were there then done, were tokens of Gods love and favour, and not causes of his hatred, as this which is here spoken of was; nor can therefore be called all their wickedness, as this here is; although the memory of what good was then done there, may make for the aggra∣vating of this evil now spoken of, as we shall by and by see. R. Tanchum seems to understand it of such evils as were com∣mitted among them while they were there shortly after their entrance into the promi∣sed land, as the fact of Achan, and the like, his words for explication of these with what he supplies, being, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I remember all their wickedness in Gilgal, as much as if he said, from the time that they entred into the land, they began to diso∣bey and rebel, as in the story of Achan and the like. S. Jerome seems to understand it with respect to the establishing of Saul there for their King, or else of their idolatries there, as if the matter were doubtful, or both might be understood. So also among the Jews Kimchi putting first, For there they in∣novated the kingdom, and cast off me that I should not reign over them: and then adding or the exposition is, In Gilgal, i. e. because the tabernacle was at first in Gilgal after they had passed over Jordan, and it was a select place, the prophets of Baal bad them there to worship Baal, because it was a chosen place. But Abarbinel not so well approving the lat∣ter fastens on the first, and looks on that which is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all their wicked∣ness, and for which he saith he hated them, to be that fact of making Saul King in that place, and so rejecting God that he should not reign over them, 1 Sam. 8.7. His proof for which seems to be because Samuel saith to them (there c. 12.17.) perceive and see, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ci raathcem rabba, that your wickedness is great which ye have done in the sight of the Lord in asking you a king, where the same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Raah is used to express that wickedness which they be∣came there, by that fact, guilty of, as is here used for that which they are now taxed for. In both places he therefore thinks the same to be meant. And of this opinion seem also n some moderne expositors; and among them Grotius explaining it as if God said that, for that fact he deservedly hated that place. (Who also, as by the way we may observe, thinketh that there is in the words another mystical sense, viz. a foretelling that the Jews should commit that horrible fact of causing Christ to be crucified in Golgo∣tha, which (he saith) according to the Syri∣ack pronountiation 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the same word as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gilgal here.)

o Others look upon both these facts by Jerome mentioned as there done, both the making of Saul king, and the Idol-worship there even of old set up, as here respected. But against the taking of these, viz. the mak∣ing of Saul king there, yea or those Idola∣tries which in Joshua's time they there com∣mitted as those things here had respect to, I suppose just exception may be made, in regard that those things were done before the twelve tribes were parted and become two kingdoms, whereas here Ephraim the ten tribes are spoken to, and threatned for such sins as they were guilty of after they became a kingdom by themselves, by the choice of Jeroboam for their king. So most probably, as we have seen all along them more particularly spoken of, and to, and not for those which were committed by the whole before they were so.

Ribera finds fault with Galatinus for re∣ferring the things spoken in this verse to the two tribes, or Judah. And that I think may be farther evident if we consider in the history of the transactions concerning Saul, that Samuel, (contrary to what is here de∣nounced) tells the people that though they had done so wickedly in asking them a king, yet if they did not turn aside from following

the Lord to go after vain things (i. e. Idols) the Lord would not yet forsake them for his great names sake, because it had pleased the Lord to make them his people, 1 Sam. 12.20. Whence it appears that the making Saul king, may not be thought alone that cause of his hating and casting off these of the ten tribes, and much less do I think that we have reason to place their wickedness, or the cause of Gods hating them and threatning them, in that state of uncircumcision that they were in when they came first to Gilgal, as p some seem to think, except we shall think that for making up the full measure of their wickedness and weight of punishment by a final destruction, as to their outward welfare and the condition of a free people and kingdom, God did now remember a∣gainst them, and put to their account, all the iniquities of their forefathers also from the beginning of their being a people. In which, whatever may be of truth, I know not what reason these words afford that it should be thought the meaning of them, there being other wickedness of theirs at present ap∣parent in Gilgal, sufficient to draw down these heavy judgments upon them, even that Idolatry there from the time of Jero∣boam their first king there probably set up, and still obstinately with contempt of all admonitions from God by his prophets, continued. And to understand the words of this is the way by many others taken, and seems to be the plainest meaning. This Cyril takes, this R. Solomo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 There they multiplied, (or gave themselves unto) the worship of idols in high pla∣ces. Kimchi also as we said, gives the reader liberty of choosing it, and it is by q many chosen, and I think least liable to exceptions.

But this being taken (to come now to the other words) how can it be said that all their wickedness was in Gilgal? Did they commit no other sins than that of Idolatry? and did they not commit that any where but in Gilgal? To the first of these may be an∣swered that r some say, that, all, here is not to be taken absolutely, but rather, compara∣tively, viz. not that they had no other sins, but that this was so great as to comprehend all others in it, so that where this was, no o∣ther could be wanting; it was s chief among them, yea the fountain of all, and such as necessarily brought with it, and so included, all others. Which therefore are reduced to a brief summe in it, by calling it all wickedness in general: so that in Gilgal where that was in so excessive measure practised, is all their wickedness, t velut in compendio quodam, as in a compendium or short abridgment seen and pointed out, and because God is v more provoked by that than by other sins.

To the other may be answer given much in the same way; that whatsoever wickedness they were given to they did there act and shew forth in their Idolatrous worship and lewd doings agreeable to it. For where that was, there were all other abominations u ac∣cordingly practised. And another answer is given, viz. That Gilgal, though for its fa∣mousness in that kind named, yet x is not a∣lone singly to be understood, but together all other places like it, or in which Idolatry and lewdness, such as in it, were practised; one named, but all of like nature compre∣hended under it. And why it alone instead of all might well be named, we shall by and by see. This, if we supply with ours and the generality of Interpreters the Verb, is or, was. But if we take R. Tanchum's supply of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I remember, there will be no place for such questions; the plain mean∣ing would be I remember, (or will remember) i. e. call them to account for all their wicked∣ness in Gilgal, by which they provoked me so to displeasure that there I hated them, &c. According to either way there is much em∣phasis in the nameing of Gilgal above o∣ther places for aggravating their wickedness, whatever sin of theirs be understood (as we have seen different opinions concerning it) in∣asmuch as that being a place wherein God had formerly shewed his goodness in so emi∣nent a manner to them, y the memory of it should have kept them from their sinning and rebelling against him. And so the words with respect to the former v. Give them, O Lord, if it be taken as a desire of evil to them, are as a confirmation of it, by shewing that it shall be certainly so because of their wic∣kedness in Gilgal, which should produce such ill effects toward them as are before, and there, and now again after, expressed; or if as a prayer for mitigation of their punish∣ment, they are as a reason why it may not be so but he will execute with severity what∣soever he had threatned to do; viz. because of the greatness of their wickedness there which he could not pardon.

But now in these interpretations that we have seen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 raatham which generally signifies, their evil, is taken for wickedness, or the evil of sin, which was the cause of his hating and punishing them, but it may otherwise be taken for evil of punishment and mischief, the effect of his hatred and displea∣sure,

and in this notion the MS. Arabick seems to take it rendring, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all their calamity is in Gilgal, as much as to say, that if any would know whence was the cause of all the evil which he would inflict on them, let him look to Gilgal; which then supposeth what in the other notion it would signify, viz. that there their wickedness was such as provoked him to hate them and to shew those effects of his hatred which follow, so that between the word so rendred and the following, there would be also evident consequence, as be∣ing both, parts of their evil, and the first the effect of the following, and so Gilgal point out and comprehend as, the place, so what was done in that place; their evil is in Gil∣gal, i. e. for what they did in Gilgal, for the evil of their doings there, he hated them, so that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Be in may either be taken in its proper signification of In, or else z for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 me, as some would have it here taken, from Gilgal.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For there I hated them. The particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ci rendred for, as it properly signifies, is by a some observed here to be used rather as an Illative, than a causal, and to denote rather therefore, than for; they did not sin there because he hated them there, but therefore he hated them there, because they sinned there. b Others think it to be used barely as an affirmative, surely. This, if it be understood of the evil of sin, but if of the evil of punishment, then will it be con∣veniently taken in its proper signification as a causal, thence is all this mischief, because there I hated them, from which hatred of mine flowes this calamity spoken of to them. And so will it be also properly taken though spoken of evil of sin, if we take R. Tan∣chums way, which we have seen, to this meaning, I remember (or will remember) their wickedness in Gilgal, for there by their evil doings they provoked me to hate them.

There I hated them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sham senetim. In both these words seems to be an Emphasis; as first in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sham, there, in that very place where heretofore I shewed such great tokens of love to, and of my gra∣cious presence with, them, even there, I have since hated them, or now hate them. They seemed to think that certainly in that place they should alwayes find God propitious, that having there then found him present with them they should still so find him, and what∣soever they did should, even for the places sake, be accepted, the hallowed place would necessarily sanctify it. But God shews the contrary, because where he had loved them, there they behaved themselves ill toward him, therefore even there doth he hate them. His love and favour is not so c confined to any place. It is the behaviour of the persons, not the place which he hath regard to, yea d the holier the place, the greater and more odious is the wickedness by which it is defiled, as appears here by what he saith, there I hated them. For that word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 senetim, I hated them, hath manifestly also its weight in it. He saith not, there was I angry, or displeased with them, but in a word e beto∣kening the greatest indignation, I hated them. Which expression argues the greatness both of their wickedness and of the punishment that God will inflict on them for it. Great must needs be that wickedness which provo∣ked the father of mercies to so great displea∣sure as to say that he hated them, and severe must needs be those judgments which are as effects of hatred and utter aversation of them, in him.

The wickedness is farther described in the next words by calling it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Raa maallehem, which ours translate, the wicked∣ness of their doings, and their punishment in the following, I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more.] For the wicked∣ness of their doings. These words are so pla∣ced as to leave it doubtful, whether they should be referred to the preceding words to make with them one clause thus, There I hated them for the wickedness of their doings, or to the following, so as to begin a new clause thus, For the wickedness of their doings I will drive, &c. And Interpreters leave us still in a doubt, while some take the one way, some the other, and others leave the matter ambiguous as they are in the original as the Chaldee doth, in which therefore some in their translating it refer it to the foregoing words, as Mercer, ibi enim eos ob corum quae faciunt improbita∣tem aversor; ex aede mea sacrosancta pellam eos. But that translation in the Polyglot Bibles, and Petrus à Figuiero also, refer it to the following; and so the LXX. (at least the Latin translation of it) to the latter; al∣though the printed Arabick which follows them, refer it to the former words, and so the Syriack also as pointed by the Latin transla∣tour. The MS. Arabick, for want of distin∣guishing points leaves it altogether ambigu∣ous 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 there I hated them because of the naughtiness of their condition, I will drive them out of my house. The vulgar Latin as

usually pointed, joins them to the latter. A∣mong modern translatours also is the like variety and ambiguity, so that by the altering of a comma they may be either way taken. Onely Munster that it may be sure he joyns them with the foregoing, inserts &, and, And I will drive them out of my house. As to the sense it makes no considerable difference at all to which they be referred, for still will they be as a cause of what mischief should befall them; onely that in the one way they are put as a cause of that hatred which produced such ill effects, in the other as a cause of the ill effects produced.

For the wickedness of their doings, what was before called all their wickedness, is here called, the wickedness of their d••irgs. And if that which is so called be under∣stood to be their Idolatry, as we have seen to be most probable, that certainly will fill up the measure of all that these expressions can contain, as being a comprehensive sin, a sin that includes in it, and draws with it, all other sins, all lewdness, filthiness, and debauchedness both of the flesh and spirit, and such as is most contrary to God, and makes men most hateful to him; especially when aggravated with such circumstances, as in the Israelites it must needs be, who wil∣fully fell to idolatry and not because they ne∣ver knew God nor had any means beyond natural light, of knowing him. For they had his Law whereby they were (except through their willing neglect) instructed in his truth and worship which now they forsake to follow their own inventions. So that the word here by some rendred as by f the vulgar Latin, propter malitiam adinventio∣num eorum, for the malice of their inventions, as the Doway version renders it, and so the Geneva English, for the wickedness of their inventions. And so is the same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Maalalim, in our newer translation, in o∣ther places (though not here) rendred, as Psal. 106.29. and 39. as also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ali∣loth, from the same root, Psal. 99.8. and the thing is indifferent and the meaning the same, by inventions, being understood as g one notes, cogitationes, studia & opera, thoughts, purposes, actions, the word h signify∣ing and including them all. Zanchi looks on his saying, malitiam operum, the wickedness of their doings, to have more in it than if he had said, mala opera, wicked works, as ex∣cluding all mixture of good, for which God might be moved not to hate the persons, though he hated the works. Here by the wickedness of their doings he is provoked to hate them, and Rivet takes it as an ex∣pression of such set purpose of doing evil and obstinacy, which makes it worse than other sins, and such as God would no longer pardon.

The odiousness of the sin appears by the sad consequents, and the severity of his judg∣ments on them which are in the next words expressed, I will drive them out of my house, &c. Something as to this expression may be taken from what hath been said on those words, against the house of the Lord, c. 8.1. and again on those, hatred in the house of his God, v. of this chapter. As the house of God, may be ve∣ry properly taken, for the temple of Jerusa∣lem, so is it by some here taken; so by the Chal∣dee paraphrast who renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 out of the house of my sanctuary. Kimchi al∣so seems so to take it, but so as to beware of an objection, which may be made against it, his exposition being, Because they have despsed and cast off me and my worship, and have cho∣sen to serve other gods, I will drive them cut of my house, so that though they would return thither and worship me in it, they shall not find how so to do, because it shall be destroyed, because they have multiplied transgression. The objecti∣on that may be deservedly made against ta∣king by my house, to be meant the temple, is because the temple was not then pertaining to Ephraim or the ten tribes, they having be∣fore deserted it, and voluntarily separated themselves from it, and the worship of God in it. This he seeks to prevent by under∣standing it, not of their being driven out of it as out of that whereof they were in pre∣sent possession, but of their being cut off from possibility of returning to what they had forsaken, though never so much desi∣rous of it, by reason that it should be taken out of the way: which though it be true viz. that the temple should be afterwards destroy∣ed, yet I think it cannot here solve the mat∣ter, it standing longer than they remained a kingdom or people of themselves, I think he had said more to the purpose if he had said, because they shall be carried captives into Assyria far from it, so that they shall not have i opportunity of going to it. And cer∣tainly, if the words be taken properly for the Temple, some such thing must be under∣stood by his driving them out of it, as k his de∣taining them from it, or not giving them oc∣casion to return, if on better thoughts they would, to that which they had wickedly de∣serted, and were now by their own default out of, or absent from. But this seems not so fully satisfactory, and therefore others think the house of God not to be here particularly taken for the temple, but in some other sense

in which it may be used, and for some other thing which it may denote, as chiefly, the whole land of Israel which was before v. 3. called the Lords land, and it was threatned there that they should not dwell in it, which is much the same in sense with what he threatens here, that he would drive them out. So Abarbinel among the Jews understands it, explaining it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will drive them out of my land which is my house, as if the whole land by reason of Gods shewing extra∣ordinary tokens of his presence in it, and so owning it for his, as well as that part of it which was by Jacob, for that reason so called were, Bethel (an house of God) a general temple. This also Jerome, seeing that it could not be properly understood of the Temple at Jerusalem, because the ten tribes were not in it, names in the first place as a convenient meaning, and as so do l many, (we may say most) others take it, yet do he and others mention also other ways, as he saying it may be meant of the name of Israel, which they falsly usurped behaving themselves unworthy of it; or of that priviledge they had of having his prophets sent to them; or more plainly so as to understand by his house, his family, so as that they should be no more accounted of his family, as sons or servants, or such as he owned for his and had regard to, I will drive them, or expunge them de coetu & congregatione fidelium meorum, out of the company and congregation of my faithful ones, de numero domesticorum & familiarium meorum, out of the number of my domesticks and familiars, so as not to take farther care of them as such; or, ejiciam eos de populo meo ut non pertineant ad populum meum, I will cast them out from my people that they shall not pertain to my people. His people may be well said to be of the houshold of God, Eph. 2.19. yea his house, 1. Tim. 3.15. Heb. 3.6. and his temple, &c. of which he saith, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God and they shall be my people, 2 Cor. 6.16. In all those ways may what he saith, that he will drive them out of his house, be well understood, and seems to comprehend them all, and so in sum to be as much as if he should say, n ego pror∣sus abdicabo, I will altogether reject and re∣nounce them, so that I will no more owne them in any relation to me, nor shall they chal∣lenge any right in me, or to any priviledges or promises which I had formerly granted or made to them, for their fathers sakes, as my peculiar people. A sad judgment certainly this, to be cut off from all interest in God and tokens of his love, though they had been but for a while to ly under it; but much ag∣gravated by that menace of continuance and duration excluding all hope of being freed from it, added in the next words, I will love them no more, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo oseph aha∣batham. The vulgar latin (as the LXX.) renders it, non addam ut diligam eos, I will not add to love them (as the Doway) the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I will not return to love them; he will not go on to love them, or shew such tokens of love to them, as he had done, but cast them off, and having cast them off not return again to love them, not reverse his sentence passed against them. Very contrary is this to what he bespeaks his Church with, Isa. 54.7, 8. For a small moment have I forsaken thee but with great mercies will I gather thee; in a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a mo∣ment, but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy redeemer. And this is a manifest argument that this is spoken peculiarly of the ten tribes and not of Judah, (as Jerome observes some to think) as appears by comparing it with c. 1.6, 7. where he saith, I will no more have mercy upon the house of Israel but I will utterly take them a∣way, but I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God.

This was made good on Israel by his giv∣ing them up to be destroyed and carried from their own land, into that Captivity from which they never returned, whereas Judah though also carried captives from their own land by the Chaldeans, who also destroyed their Temple, yet after seventy years return∣ed and were restored again to their Countrey and rebuilt the Temple. For it cannot be thought that this was a prophecy of that ca∣ptivity after Christ's time in which the Jews now are, though (as o one saith) it may be accommodated to it; as, according to Gro∣tius, as we said, what is spoken of the wic∣kedness of the ten tribes at Gilgal, may be to what the Jews did at Golgotha. How this was fulfilled as to the ten tribes, to whom it was properly denounced, is visible to all the world, in the utter destruction of their kingdom, described the 2 King. 17. where the Lord is said to have removed them out of his sight, v. 18.23. when he gave them up into the hand of Shalmaneser king of Assyria, who in the ninth year of Hoshea their last king, took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and Habor by the river Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes, (v. 6.) placing other strange people in their rooms (v. 24.) so that they never recovered the state of a kingdom or face of a distinct nati∣on unto this day, but remain dispersed a∣mong the nations and conformed to their man∣ners. Was not in this verified what he here threatens, that he would drive them out of his m

house, and would love them no more? For so it is manifest that by his loving them is meant in this place, a restoring to them those out∣ward tokens of favour to them in temporal prosperity, and the enjoyment of a flourishing kingdom which he so then took away from them as never to restore it to them again. It was a national judgement, and so involved the whole of them, as to their outward con∣dition which they enjoyed as members of that nation, and making up one body politick, not respecting the spiritual condition of single per∣sons and the relation they stood in, as concer∣ning that, to God; which, if it were right, this doth not cut them off from Gods favour, and care and protection and tokens of his love to them in their single capacities; nor doth it ex∣clude them from capacity of being, upon their coming into Christ, made members of his kingdom, and enjoying the priviledges of them, as may appear by what we finde above c. 1. v. 10.11. where, after Gods severe threats that he would no more have mercy upon the house of Israel, but utterly take them away, v. 6. and saying of them, that they were not his peo∣ple and that he would not be their God, v. 9. which he would shew by causing to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel, and breaking their bow (ta∣king away their temporal power as he premi∣sed v. 4, 5. yet he presently subjoyns in re∣spect to that favour that he would reach forth to them in Christ, according to his promise made to Abraham and his seed, (his genuine seed, a title agreeing as well to other nations as to them) viz. not that of the flesh, but of the pro∣mise, Rom. 9.8. in what follows, that yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea which cannot be measured, nor numbred, and it shall come to pass that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God, Hos. 1.10. viz. by being gathered together under one head, v. 11. and so again c. 2.23. I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy, and I will say to them that were not my peo∣ple, Thou art my people: which things are spoken of those that are here spoken of; though not of them alone, yet without ex∣clusion of, yea certainly including them, and do not at all contradict what is here said, and was, and still is, made good on them, viz. I will drive them out of my house, I will love them no more. This is made good according to the letter, and as it sounds, and was meant, yet without excluding the other which though not expressed, yet was still to be understood, by vertue of the pro∣mise made to Abraham and his seed to be made good in Christ in respect of his spi∣ritual kingdom, which is not by the taking away the power and pomp of their tem∣poral kingdom, to be impaired, but rather furthered and promoted. By vertue of this doom, and the manner in which it hath been exe∣cuted, can they never have hope of returning to that house of the Lord, out of which they were then driven, or to finde like visible to∣kens of his love as till then they had done. If they will have any thing to comfort them against it they must not stand on their earthly priviledges, which they have forfeited, as Isra∣el according to the flesh, but look p unto Christ, to whom if they shall, in sincere faith, come and be made true members of his kingdom, though the least therein or in the lowest con∣dition, they shall be happier than if they had been in those days, or, in its most flourishing condition, princes of Samaria. Those that were then so, their greatness could not ex∣empt from this judgment, which indeed seems chiefly and in a more severe manner directed against them as being main causes of provoking God to send it both on them∣selves and the people as the next words inti∣mate in which he saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 col sarehem sorerim, All their princes are revolters, the Chaldee hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the printed Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rebellious, LXX. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 disobedient, MS. Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as the vulgar recedentes all to the same purpose. Of the signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 see above c. 4.16. By their princes may be meant all in dignity or authority, q in civil or ecclesiastical affairs and places who were here taxed as main causes of the wickedness that was among them, r yet not with exemption of the people as if they were innocent, and not faulty for fol∣lowing them. If the history be looked in∣to, it will be found that s from Jeroboam the first, unto the last of their kings, all of them were such as departed, and drew to∣gether with them their subjects, from the true worship of God unto Idolatry, wor∣shipping false gods, or, t at the best that they could pretend, likening the True to the similitude of a calf. They would doubt∣less see that their princes, and such as were in favour about them, should be like them∣selves, and then the people would in herds follow them, so that the saying, that the governours, those by whose example and incouragement they were led on, and who should have kept them in obedience to God, were such, viz. all revolters from God, what doth it less then express a general corruption in religion and defection from God among them, and nothing to be sound in the whole body, from the head to the foot? So Cyril expounds it as much as to sound

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. That there was none good, obedient or flexible to be found among them, nor little, nor great, nor prince, nor any of the under sorts among them. It is as much as to say (saith Theophylact) If the subjects only had been wicked, perhaps I might have spared them for the goodness of their princes, as heretofore I spared the Israelites for Moses's sake, but now when even the princes are disobedient, and not onely one or two, but universally all, how shall I now pardon their offences? how shall I spare them? what mediatour shall stand between me and them? None (saith Cyril) is there to re∣buke them that offend, to recall those that err, or who can by his own goodness and vertue pacifying God avert his wrath, as there was in the time of Moses. So that in these words there is a reason of Gods irreconcileable dis∣pleasure with Ephraim, and a declaration of even a necessity of his sending on them such judgments as he had before denounced, and of which there is a recapitulation in the next words.

V. 16. Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.

Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit, &c. In these words are Ephraim (or the ten Tribes) spoken of in such language as seems to concern a tree, so inti∣mating a comparison between them and a tree or plant, as a vine or the like, whose condition is such as is in them described. The Chaldee Paraphrast (or Jonathan) there∣fore expresseth the terms of the compari∣son rendring well to the sense though with a little alteration in the words: The house of Israel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are like a tree whose root is scorched below, and his leaf above dried (or withered) it shall not bear fruit, &c. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Huccah, is smitten, is such as though of larger signification is in proper lan∣guage spoken of trees or plants when by any chance marred as Exod. 9.25. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vehiccah habarad and the hail smote the herb of the field, and v. 31. and 32. and the flax and the barley 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nuccetah was smitten, but the wheat and the rie, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lo nuccu were not smitten, and Amos 4.9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hiccethi ethcem, I have smitten you with blasting and mildew, spoken in respect to their fields, gardens, and vineyards; and Jon. 4.7. it is said that the Lord prepared a worm, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vattac and it smote the gourd that it withe∣red, and Ps. 102.5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 huccah caesheb, My heart is smitten as an herb (or grass) and withered. This Verb is by the Chaldee paraphrast according to the ordina∣ry printed Copies rendred 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(dikla) which is burnt or scorched, but perhaps it may be corrected out of a MS. copy of Kimchi, in which is read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 di leka, which is smitten (as by that he usually expresseth the Hebrew word there used) although if the other be retained, it comes to one pass ex∣pressing that by which a tree is made unca∣pable of bearing fruit, and which happening to it it may well be said to be smitten.

But Ephraim being so smitten, or to be smitten (for though the Verb be in the Preter tense, signifying a thing already done, it may be, and is by some so, understood in the no∣tion of the Future, or what was yet to come u ob certitudinem, because as certain to be done, as if already done, as the like use of Verbs of such condition, we have before more than once observed) it will be asked, by whom have they been, or shall they be smitten? By the hands of their enemies, saith Kimchi; so others by the w Assyrians made use of by God for that purpose. But I suppose it will be better to say, By God, or by Gods curse or judgment on them; which will better agree to what follows, than to impute it to any thing done by the hand of man; as by considering the consequents in the following words will appear: which effects or conse∣quents are in the first place, that through their being thus smitten, their root is dried up, an expression certainly of great mischief and ut∣ter perdition to them. A tree may be blasted or blighted, or any way smitten in the top or branches, yea have much violence done to it in the body or boughs, yet as long as the root remains whole, safe, quick and uncor∣rupted, it may again recover and bear fruit; but if the root be dried up and withered, there is no farther hope from it. It being so with Ephraim, they likened to such a tree or plant, it is to be enquired what is meant by their root? Virtus prolificandi, saith Lyra, and so Grotius vis genitrix, the power of being fruitful and multiplying, which was Gods blessing to man at his first creation, Gen. 1.28. and again repeated to Noah and his sons after the deluge, Gen. 9.1. So that the sub∣traction of this, must be, as it were, an un∣manning or unpeopling them. Of this Mercer likewise thinks it spoken, Privandi sunt à Do∣mino sobolis procreandae facultate, They shall by God be deprived of the faculty of procreation. Which seems to have been likewise the mind of Aben Ezra who saith that here is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a comparison of fathers and chil∣dren, as also of David Kimchi that he com∣pares them to a tree whose root is dried up

which beareth not fruit, so saith he 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they also shall not bear (or have) children, as he said above, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception. And indeed these words here seem but a repeat∣ing in other terms what was there said, and the comparing those with these seems to ju∣stify this exposition; yet do others otherwise take here the meaning of the word root. Je∣rome thinks to be meant by it either God in quo fundatus erat, in whom he was rooted, or else their fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in quibus radicem miserat, in whom he had ta∣ken root, but now they were altogether un∣worthy of them, and did not shew forth any thing of goodness that they had received from them. x Others, Gratiam & favorem Dei, the grace and favour of God, without which their common-wealth could not stand; which root is said to be dried up when men for their sins are deprived of it. y Others their king∣dom, z or kingly power, or the strength of the ten tribes who should have no more strong and valiant children, to defend and uphold their kingdom. Abarbinel not much unlike, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 their strong and mighty men, (or their kings and princes, as Montanus ex∣plaineth it who being slain by the enemy the rest must needs perish) or else according to o∣thers, as he saith, the a fathers or parents among them, which should be taken away by death.

But however any of these may be well un∣derstood, the first exposition appears to be the plainest, as in respect to those former words of which (as we said) the meaning seems in these repeated, so in respect to the following here, which are likewise a reca∣pitulation of what was before said, they shall bear no fruit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 word for word, they shall not make fruit, i. e. shall not pro∣duce, or beget children. So are children cal∣led fruit, Shall the women eat their fruit? Lam. 2.20. The fruit of the body (viz. of men) Deut. 28.11.18. or of their bellies, as lite∣rally 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sounds, and is so rendred by ours the fruit of thy womb, Deut. 7.13. and so Psal. 127.3. The fruit of the womb, and so Lam. 1.42. and the fruit of thy loyns, Act. 2.30. out of Psal. 132.11. where it is the fruit of thy belly, children being called fruit, uteri non solum materni sed etiam paterni, as Dru∣sius observes. When the root of a tree is withered the upper parts thereof will not bring forth fruit. Ephraim shall appear like such a z tree, in that they shall be barren and not multiply children.

But sometimes from such roots, having some little life left, may spring up some sprouts, or some life be diffused to some parts of the tree, but not able to bring any fruit to perfection. In this also shall Ephraim be but like such decayed trees by the decay and destruction of such children which they shall have. So saith he, Yea though they bring forth, I will slay even the beloved fruit, of their womb, or as it is in the margin the desires 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 machamadde bi••nam, the de∣sirable things of their womb, i. e. their desired fruit of their bodies, their dearest and most beloved children. In the vulgar Latin it is rendred, amantissima, which Grotius takes to be a mistake in the writing, for amatissi∣ma, and so the Doway renders, the best belov∣ed things of their womb, the LXX. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is the same with our margin, the desires, and so the printed Arabick following the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the desires of their wombs, but the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the desired things of their bowels. The Syriack 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the desire of their bowels. The Chaldee paraphrast 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the beau∣ty (or choicest) of their bowels, children be∣ing that which they esteemed their grace and glory: nothing having been accounted among them more a disgraceful than barrenness, and it is by b learned men observed that desideria desires, are a title given to children. Now his saying that though they bring forth yet he will slay the beloved fruit (or desires) of their womb, what is it but a repeating or summing up of what he before said? v. 12. Though they bring up their children yet will I bereave them that there be not a man. And V. 13. E∣phraim shall bring forth his children to the mur∣derer, and so the comparing of the words ju∣stifies (as we say) the first exposition.

That there may not seem to be in these last mentioned verses, and the following any contradiction, while some words sound as if there should be an utter excision of the peo∣ple, others seem to require that there should be a remainder of them as it is manifest there was, it is well observed c by some, that he here speaks of the complexe body of the peo∣ple, not of single persons, and that therefore while they were so diminished as that they continued not longer to be a people, or ever in hopes of growing to be so again, a king∣dom of Ephraim or Israel under their own king and laws, the prophecy had its full com∣pletion, though many of them still remained singly dispersed among other nations.

Before we leave these words there are some little differences betwixt interpreters concer∣ning the signification and construction of some of them which we may observe, as

first, that the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Huccah, gene∣rally rendred, is smitten, is by the Greek rendered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the Latin Translator renders deluit, is grieved, and the next words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is withered as to his roots, or according to another reading d 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath made dry his roots, it shall no more bring forth fruit. But the printed Arab••ck taking another notion which the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath, and changing also the construction renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim hath wearied his roots, he is dried up, and shall no more yield fruit. The expressions in them both are more obscure than in the Hebrew, yet give the same sense. The Syriack changing nothing as to the sig∣nification of the words, yet doth as to the construction usually made, having 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephraim is smitten in the root, and is dried that it cannot bear fruit. In the other words there is no variety any way considerable, and notwithstanding this or any other diffe∣rent expositions which we have seen, we have still the scope of the words, to wit, to set forth the diminishing of Israel as to their glo∣ry, multitude of men, strength and power, by a firm decree from God, which is accor∣ding to that curse which was anciently de∣nounced against them in the Law if they should become disobedient, and walk con∣trary to him, that he then would make them be left few in number. Levit. 26.22. Deut 4.27. v. 28.62.

V. 17. My God will cast them away, because they did not hearken to him: and they shall be wanderers among the nations.

My God will cast them away, because they did not hearken unto him. These words seem a conclusion from what had been before said, both in the person of God concerning his judgments determined against Ephraim, from v. the 11^th. hitherto, and in the person of the Prophet interposing his petition v. 14. whe∣ther understood of good or ill to them. And R. Tanchum takes these also to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 e a narration to wit, of what should be, under the language of a petiti∣on; so as if the words did found, let my God cast them off. The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yimeas, be∣ing the Future tense may well enough be so used, otherwise in the proper siguification of the Future and signifying my God will, or shall cast them away, it will still be the pro∣phets amen or f assent to what God hath said, a confirmation or declaration of the certainty of what he hath said he would do, an utter rejection of them not only from being a pe∣culiar people to him, but from being a di∣stinct people, a free kingdom or nation by themselves, as they had hitherto been, but g that they should be lost among the heathe∣nish nations, mingled with them, and of no other account than they, with him.

h My God, (saith he) as if he were only his God, who clave to him, not theirs who had by their disobedience departed from him, and so had i declared to him, that k he should declare it to them, that God would be no longer their God. Such weight doth the Pronoun my, joyned to the name God seem to have, though the Greek and printed Arabick do quite omit it, rendring only, God shall cast them away. By it likewise he asserts his au∣thority in speaking what he did, it being not from himself but from his God, who owned him for his prophet and messenger.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yimasem, will cast them away, the same Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Maas, we have above c. 4.6. and there rendred by reject; the same that here, to cast away, it signifying also to abomi∣nate, to abhorr, or despise, to cast away with loathing and indignation, as some vile and con∣temptible thing.

I will cast them away, viz. à gratia & favo∣re suo, from his grace and favour, no more to owne them for his people or as so to preserve them, de terra promissionis, out of the land of promise, l others, and this because they did not hearken unto him, did not hearken unto his commandments to observe and do them, to do what he commanded them, and to abstain from what he forbad. So the MS. Arabick explains it in his rendring 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seeing they received not his command and his prohibition; his affirmative and negative precepts, as they usually speak. For this their rejecting him in resusing to hearken to him, and disobediently behaving themselves, he will certainly reject them, and so being driven out of his house, (v. 15.) not suffered to dwell in the Lords land, v. 3. they shall be no more a nation of themselves, but wande∣rers among the notions, as vagabonds, having no seat or setled habitation of their own, un∣der their own laws and government. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vayibyu nodedim baggoim, and they shall be wanderers among the nations, very like that to which Cain was sentenced Gen. 4.12.13. that he should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 naa venod, A fugitive and a vagabond in the earth, which he complains of as a punishment greater than he could bear. Behold (saith he) thou hast driven me out this day from the face of

the earth, and from thy face shall I be hid, and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth. And what is less to these, when they shall no longer be suffered to dwell in the Lords land, v. 3. when he shall depart from them, v. 12. when he shall drive them out of his house, v. 15. when he shall cast them away, and they shall be wan∣derers among the nations? which denotes that they shall be m dispersed among the nations, so as to be (as it were) lost among them, and be no more a distinct people by them∣selves, not having any set place to reside in, but scattered abroad, according to the lan∣guage of St. James, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which title he gives to the whole twelve tribes, c. 1. v. 1. which as it may be well accommodated to the two tribes also, as matters then stood with them, and do stand since Christs time, so certainly do most properly, in regard to what is here threatned, agree to the ten here spoken of, and we may well think were also by him meant. For though he there speaks to them as such as were called, or were to be called into Christs kingdom, and in him be again received into Gods favour and the houshold of faith, yet doth not that contra∣dict or disanul the irreversible sentence of God as concerning their outward estate or re∣stauration of a temporal kingdom, which was so to be made good, as it hath been made good, salvo Dei promisso de Dei in Christo beneficio (as one n speaks) and we have before intimated, still salving and pre∣serving entire the promise of God in respect to the benefits of Christ, and that kingdom of his which he saith was not of this world. For though that hath been made good, and still remains to be made good, to them, yet still remains unreversed this irrevocable sen∣tence, as to their temporal state and face of an earthly kingdom, so as that they remain still wanderers or dispersed among other na∣tions, and have never been restored, nor are in likelyhood of ever being restored, to their own land, so as to call it their own. If ever any of them hath returned thither, it hath been but as strangers, and all, as to any propriety that they should challenge in it, hath been but to hear the ruines and wast heaps of their ancient cities to eccho or sound in their ears that language, Mic. 2.10. Arise ye and depart, for this is not your rest; your ancestors pollu∣ted it and ye shall never return as a people thither, to inhabit it as in your former condi∣tion. This to this purpose here threatned is that also which in the Law was anciently threatned to them, that if they would not o∣bey the voice of the Lord who had before re∣joyced over them to do them good, and to multi∣ply them, he would rejoyce over them to de∣stroy them, and to bring them to nought, and would pluck them out of their land, and scatter them among all people, so that they should find no ease nor rest, &c. o Deut. 28.63, 64. When this sentence began to be executed on them we find in the history, 2 Kings 15.29. and 17.6. and 1, Chron. 5.26. But that they ever after returned, under the face of a peo∣ple, to their own land we no where find, and have just reason to be confident that they ne∣ver shall, God having here said, that he will love them no more, to shew tokens of his fa∣vour to them in that kind. Meanwhile E∣phraim here is an example, not only to par∣ticular persons that as they will avoid perso∣nal judgments, so they take care faithfully to serve God and hearken to him, but to na∣tions and kingdoms also, that as they will pre∣vent national judgments, so they take care that God be truly served, and the true reli∣gion maintained in purity and sincerity, a∣mong them. Ephraim, or, Israel, held their land by as good and firm tenure as any peo∣ple in the world can theirs, having it setled on them by immediat gift from him who is, the Lord of the whole earth, who promised it to their forefathers Abraham and his seed for ever, Gen. 12.13.15. Deut. 34.4. called therefore, the land which the Lord sware unto them, Num. 14. and which he had promised them, Deut. 9.28. and elsewhere the land of promise, Heb. 11.9. Who could have greater right to a place, better and firmer right, than they had to the Lords land, by his promise which never fails, and his oath who will not repent, confirmed to them? Certainly if they had observed conditions and kept covenant with him, all the people in the world could never have driven them out, or dispossessed them of it; but seing they revelted and brake his covenant, and did not hearken to him, he would not suffer them longer to dwell in it, but drave and cast them out of it, so that they could never recover it again, but conti∣nue to this day wandring among the nations, so as scarce to be found out, having no settled place of their own, no where where they can be called a people, or are for such owned. And if God so dealt with Israel on their dis∣obedience and departing from his service, to whom he had so particularly ingaged him∣self to make good to them the firm possession of that land; how shall any presume on any right or title to any other, or think to preserve it to themselves by any force or strength of their own, if they revolt from him, and cast off thankful obedience to him? the Apostle cautioneth and teacheth us so to argue, if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee, and therefore warneth, not to be high minded, and presumptuous, but to fear, Rom. 11.20, 21.

Notes

• a

  Menoch.
• b

  Merc. Rivet. Tarnov.
• c

  Zanchi, Rivet.
• d

  Jos. Hen. Ursin.
• e

  Zanchi.
• f

  Non laetaberis, Brenn.
• g

  See Shind.
• h

  Lively, Rivet.
• i

  Drus. Tarn.
• k

  Rivet.
• l

  Mercer.
• m

  Vat.
• n

  Trem.
• o

  So Casta∣lio, Ne laetare Israelita ut caeterae nationes exultant.
• q

  Vindic. p. 560.
• r

  Lively, figura quae litotes di∣citur, non laetari positum pro lugere & dolore affici.
• s

  Rivet and see Capito.
• t

  Jun. Tr. Pisc.
• v

  Drus. Petr. a Fig. propterea quod fornicatus es à Deo tuo Tirin. quod fornicatus sis.
• w

  Tarnov.
• x

  Rivet.
• y

  c. 1. 2. c. 4. 12.
• z

  So the Chaldee renders, for ye have erred, or departed from the service of your God; and so the MS. Arab.
• a

  Tarnov.
• b

  Drus.
• c

  Vulg. LXX.
• d

  Trem.
• e

  Tig. Pare.
• f

  See Capito, Drus.
• g

  The MS. Arab. renders it there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so Eccl. 16.33. as if it were such a thing as is given to deceive, and allure; Captura, Drus.
• i

  So the Chaldee. ye have loved to serve Idols on all corn floors.
• k

  Aben Ez. Theophylact. Hall.
• l

  Mercer. Rivet.
• m

  Cum abundantia frugum esset eam acceptam referebas Diis tuis, quibus etiam mercedem solvebas, viz. de∣cimas Deo debitas. Drus.
• n

  Capito, and see Drus. and Doway translat.
• h

  Isai. 9.3.
• o

  Compare Joel chap. 1. vers. 4. &c. and v. 11.12.
• p

  See Rivet.
• q

  Pagnin.
• r

  Munster, Tig. Capito.
• s

  See Capito. It is in the Rabbins also used for such vessels as they put olives in for the press, or the press it self, R. Tanch. in Morthed.
• t

  On Micah 6.15.
• v

  See chap. 4.18.19.
• w

  Interlin.
• x

  Jun. Trem.
• y

  They compare also Job, 41.9. and Hos. 10.13. Rivet.
• z

  Lively, Grot. Rivet. Drus.
• a

  And see above, c. 4.10. and 8.7.
• b

  Chaldee Par. Syr. LXX. Vulg. Lat.
• c

  The other is in 2 Kin. 3.24. see Kimchi.
• d

  On c. 4.19.
• e

  Capito, and Munster, therefore supply here gente.
• f

  This is wanting in the copy of R. Tanch. but supplied from Kimchi.
• g

  See Tarnov.
• h

  Grot.
• i

  Zanchi.
• k

  Rivet.
• l

  Deutr. 11.12.
• m

  Deutr. 9.6.
• n

  Petr. à Fig.
• o

  Compare Psal. 137.4.
• p

  Zanchi.
• q

  See Abarb.
• r

  Trem.
• s

  So Tobit, Tob. 1.10, &c.
• t

  And see Grot.
• w

  Rivet.
• x

  Menoch. Tirin. Petr. à Fig. &c.
• y

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as if they had read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yashab for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 veshab. Trem.
• z

  Trem. Zanchi.
• a

  Rivet.
• u

  Capito. Meritum est flagellum, polluta dum in terra liberi egerunt, e••ere non sunt reveriti, dati sunt in necessitatem tantam, quae polluta horreant ut edant inviti.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimchi rad.
• c

  Isai. 57.6. Jer. 7.18.
• d

  Sa.
• e

  Zanchi. and see Calv. and Rivet.
• f

  Trem. see the several Translations, in Zanchi & Pagnin.
• g

  See Trem.
• h

  L. de Dieu.
• i

  Jun. Tr. Glass. Gram. p. 712.
• k

  See Pisc. Zanchi.
• l

  Neque condient Lat.
• m

  Levit. 3.11. and 21.6.17.22. Num. 28.2. Ezech. 44.7.
• n

  Lud. de Dieu.
• o

  Mal. 3.4.
• K. rad.
• p

  Jun. Tr. Lively.
• q

  Tarnov. Rivet.
• r

  L. de Dieu.
• s

  So are offerings called bread. Mal. 1.7.
• t

  Vatab.
• v

  It may be for carnal food, to them as ordinary bread, but not for Spiritual as Sacrifices duly offered would have been, saith Zanchi.
• x

  Sanctius.
• y

  Menoch. Tarnov. and see. Merc. Petr. à Fig. cites as out of Ab. Ezra. propter sterilitatem nec ad libandum quidem Domino ••abebunt, but I find it not in the ordinary Copies of Ab. Ez.
• z

  See c. 8.13.
• a

  See the Chaldee.
• b

  Drus. and see Petr. à Fig.
• c

  And so Oecal.
• d

  De tempore intermedio. and Tremell. to the like purpose.
• e

  Called therefore daies 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their gladness. Numb. 10.10.
• f

  See Maimon. Chagigah c. 1.
• g

  River.
• h

  By the taking away of which, cause of sorrow is elswhere expressed, Lam. 1.4.2.6.
• i

  Grot.
• k

  Tremel.
• l

  Tremel.
• m

  And see in Theophylact the same mentioned.
• n

  Which will be true in that place Lam. 2.7. but not in this except by way of comparison, as to the signification of the word.
• o

  Mercer. Capito.
• p

  Petr. á Fig.
• q

  Capito.
• r

  Ab. Ez. Drus. Jun. Trem. Rivet.
• s

  Geneva bible, from destruction.
• a

  The Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Spoilers. See more of this word on c. 7.13.
• b

  Tarnov.
• c

  Drus.
• d

  Pisc.
• e

  Lively, Grot.
• f

  Calv. Pare. Zanchi.
• g

  From 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to lay hold on or apprehend.
• h

  Kimchi. There shall they dy by Famine or Sword.
• i

  R. Tanch. Kimchi.
• k

  On which place see Junius.
• l

  Chr. à Castro Rivet,
• m

  Trem. Zanchi.
• n

  A note of the Dative case, or signifying, to or for, and may, as the place requires, be rendred of, as equiva∣lent to the Genitive case, as Psalmus Le David, a Psalm to, i. e. of David
• o

  Jerom. Sa. Menoc. Tirin. Grot. Rivet.
• p

  Tarnov.
• q

  Zanc••i.
• r

  So both in the Hebrew and Arabic Tongues, doth that letter added in the be∣gining, often import.
• s

  In the Polyglot Mercer, in elegantibus & sumptuosis eorum aedibus. Petr. à Fig. in domo optabili ac pretiosa argenti ipsorum.
• t

  Jun. Trem, who render it, desideratissima tentoria ad argentum eorum. Domos desiderabiles propter ar gentum eorum Munst.
• v

  Domos inauratas, Zanchi. Danae.
• w

  See in Poole from Mor.
• x

  Mercer.
• y

  As Jun. Tr.
• z

  Metonymia adjuncti Pisc. and see Dutch notes.
• as allso 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Arabic, by which the Arab. MS. here renders it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• a

  Rivet.
• b

  Tarnov.
• c

  R. Tarch. in his dictionary Morshed.
• d

  Rivet.
• e

  Bibl. Frankf.
• f

  Although in the ordinary Copies of Jerome there is a manifest mistake in putting those letters, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which should rather be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath there no place.
• g

  Num. 14.18.
• h

  Abarb.
• i

  Calv. Zanchi. Drus. Pare. Tarnov.
• k

  Trem. and see Jun. Trem. version.
• l

  Which some by an error, as Lyra observes, read as two words, Scito te.
• m

  Ribera. C. à Castro. Jerom. hims. saith no such thing, but rather the contrary.
• n

  Which signifies one that speakes inwardly to himself, or by the suggestion of the Devil. Kamus.
• o

  Liveley.
• p

  Pagn. Interlin.
• q

  See Tarnov. who seemes to approve of it as the best.
• r

  Calv. Zanchi. Rivet. see Riber. As the name of God is given to Idols, of Prophets to false Prophets, Liveley,
• s

  Rivet.
• t

  Trem. Rivet. Tarnov.
• u

  Kimchi. Merc. Drus.
• w

  Petr. à Fig.
• x

  Kimchi.
• y

  Accordingly Castal, simultatis magnitudinem.
• z

  Pisc. Cr. a Castro. Pare,
• a

  Gualt. Merc.
• b

  Dan. Grot.
• c

  Abarb. Zanchi.
• d

  So I thinke rather than as Mercer renders it, quia, because thou wentest.
• e

  And see Tarnov.
• f

  As especially Idolatry which some think here particularly meant, so Mercer.
• g

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but Abarbinel cites or explains him thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is to every one of you with God.
• h

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• i

  Mercers à Petr, à Fig. translation.
• k

  For there is observed here a double reading in the Chaldee, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Petr. à Fig. and Coddeus.
• C. à Castro.
• l

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

  Ar. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• n

  Trem. Drus. Cappel.
• o

  See R. Nathans Concord. and Schindl. see Jud. 8.16. and R. Tanch. there who renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he taught, or as our Margin, he made to know, by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 punished, tormented, chastised.
• p

  Trem.
• q

  Cyril. and see Tremel.
• s

  I. H. Ursin.
• r

  By which word the MS. Arab. renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Meshugga, preceding.
• t

  See on Micha. 7.4.
• v

  Petr. à Fig.
• Chr. à Castro.
• w

  See in Calv. Trem. Tarnov. &c.
• x

  See in Calv. and Trem. Speculator Ephraim olim sequebatur Deum meum, ac nunc propheta est laqueus in omnibus viis suis, &c. Mercer.
• y

  In Trem. and Zanchi.
• z

  See also in Zanchi. He will speak with God, when he speakes, but contrary to what he speaks. Tarnov.
• a

  See more examples in Noldins Concord.
• b

  Lively, and see Drus.
• c

  Mercer. de Dieu.
• d

  This way doth Drus. also mention as good, and Vat. also
• e

  Chr. à Castro Paraphrase and Commentary.
• f

  See it explained by Piscator.
• g

  Tarnov.
• h

  Tee nown being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• i

  L. de Dieu.
• k

  Theophylact.
• l

  Cyril.
• m

  And Drus. also thinkes it may be read.
• n

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

  Kimchi.
• p

  Merc. Jun. prophetae ipsius.
• q

  Abarb. Rivet. Tarn. à Castro, &c.
• r

  L. de Dieu.
• s

  Lively.
• v

  Drus.
• w

  Rivet.
• x

  Id.
• y

  Sunt adversarii, i. e. adversantur Deo suis men∣daciis. vel populum adversum faciunt. Pare.
• t

  Jerom. Calvin. and see Zanchi.
• z

  Kimchi. Abarb.
• a

  Petr. à Fig.
• b

  Merc.
• c

  See Zanchi.
• d

  See Zanchi, and Rivet.
• e

  In the court of the house of the Lord, 2 Chron 25.21.
• f

  Some copies have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. See Bib. Wechel. and Drus.
• g

  Var. Lect. in Bib. Frankf. Wekel.
• h

  Trem. Drus. L. de Dieu.
• i

  Lively.
• k

  Drus.
• l

  The Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shichet though of active forme, yet by reason of themselves, waies, manners or the like, understood in it, will so sound.
• m

  Geneva note.
• n

  Pagnin.
• o

  Petr. à Fig.
• p

  See c. 10.9.
• q

  Cyril. Theophylact.
• r

  c. 7.4.
• s

  Petr. à Fig. and so do some of the Jews. see Yalkut.
• r

  R. Sol. Ab. Ez. Kimchi, Calvin, &c.
• t

  Drus. River.
• v

  Liveley.
• w

  Galv.
• x

  Vat.
• y

  Grot.
• s

  Abarb.
• z

  Deut. 5.27.
• y

  And see Yalkut out of Tanchum.
• z

  Deut. 5.27.
• a

  Brennius.
• x

  Ezeck. 16.15.
• b

  Abarb.
• c

  Pare. Emphasis est in relativo Ipsi.
• d

  Calv, Drus. Trem. Pare. Rivet congressi cum Baal Peor. Mercer.
• e

  Grot. Bren.
• Idolum pudoris, Interlin. in marg.
• f

  R. Tanch. in Jer. 3.24. see above in c. 3.4. v. 148.
• g

  Jerom and many others.
• h

  Moreh. Neb. l. 3. c. 45.
• k

  i. e. to Baal Peor. Cyril.
• i

  See of him Selden de Diis Syr. Syntag. 1. c. 5. Capito & Drus. who cites him.
• l

  Theodoret. Theoph. Lyra Munster.
• m

  So Deut. 29.17. 2 Chron. 15.8. 2 Kings 23.13.
• n

  Amos. 4.5. pro arbitrio suo, Lively. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Tanc.
• Buxt. Vindic. part, 2. c. 8. p. 630.
• o

  So R. Tanch. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• p

  See Rivet.
• q

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because he that serv∣eth an abomination is an abomination. Kimchi MS.
• s

  Grot.
• r

  See Ribera and Oecolamp, and Rivet.
• t

  Vat. Mont. Zanchi.
• u

  Pisc. Tarn.
• w

  Except it should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Camohabbatehem, as their love.
• x

  Drus. Tarn. Cappel. p. 229.
• z

  And so Cyril.
• a

  And so Jerom.
• b

  Crit. S. p. 229.
• d

  Or as Mercer, abominabiles evaserunt ut ea quae amabant.
• y

  Tarnov.
• c

  Vindic. p. 630.
• g

  Bib. Polyg.
• h

  Which reading Cyril follows.
• i

  So in the Latine copy, for the Greek I have not.
• k

  Cyril. and see Theophylact.
• l

  Jerom. Theophylact.
• m

  Trem.
• n

  Ribera Chr. à Castro. &c.
• o

  Petr. à Fig.
• p

  Chr. à Castro.
• q

  See in Rivet.
• I know not why by some this is inserted, and read, Children are the Glory of their Fathers. Lively, Rivet.
• r

  Gen. 17.4.
• s

  Munster, Regnum & omnia dona hujus populi. Merc.
• t

  Trem.
• u

  And see Moses his Blessing, Deut. 33.17.
• w

  Lively, Drus. Grot.
• x

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimchi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abarb.
• y

  Petr. à Fig.
• z

  Abarb. and see Micah 1.3.49. and Zanch. Capito.
• a

  Zanchi. Lively, &c.
• b

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kimchi. radic.
• c

  Tig. &c.
• d

  Rivet.
• e

  See Vat. Menoch. Tirin. Rivet. Trem.
• f

  Lively, Drus.
• g

  In radic. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Tanch.
• h

  And Levit. 26.22. Deut. 4.27.
• i

  Bren.
• k

  So as to sound, the most of them shall be cur off, for certainly some were preserved, River.
• l

  Ju••. Tr.
• m

  Grut.
• n

  Pare.
• o

  Tig.
• p

  Pag.
• q

  Castal.
• Za••chi.
• r

  Pre••
• s

  P••s.
• t

  See on••. 8.4.
• u

  Pet. à Fig.
• w

  So is it by Kimchi.
• x

  In isto exilio.
• y

  Zanchi. Tarnov. from Luther.
• z

  See Buxt. Lex,
• a

  See above c. 4.10.
• b

  Capito.
• v

  Galatinus also mentions it, l. 1. c. 8. p 54.
• x

  See Raim, which Noun and such use of it, Ribera denies to be found.
• y

  Ut opus Incarnatior is removerent à Deo, Riv.
• b

  See the Discourse concerning this at the end of my Comment on Malachi.
• c

  Drus.
• d

  Ephraim ut vi∣diest similis Tyro, Tig Vat. Cast.
• e

  Vulg. erat Tyrus.
• f

  Trem. Pag.
• g

  Interlin.
• g

  Jun. Trem. &c.
• h

  Tig. Vat. Pisc. Cast.
• i

  For though Ephraim be usually the masc. gender, yet is it also in the foem. as c. 5.9 and see on this c. 5. v. 2. p. 438.
• k

  See Trem.
• i

  Jun. Trem.
• m

  Or pulchro loco a fair place, Drus.
• n

  Munst. Tig.
• o

  Castr.
• p

  Pag. Trem. Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in its buildings, Arab. MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• q

  And see Isai. 23.
• r

  Jun. Tr.
• s

  Pag.
• t

  Riv. Tarn.
• u

  Dane Gro••.
• w

  Pag. Cast.
• x

  Jun. Trem.
• z

  Munst.
• a

  Trem.
• b

  Capito, who saith animadverte in verbo plantatus similitudinem ad arborem, implic tam.
• y

  Drus.
• c

  And so is Zanchi. as his judgment.
• d

  Munst. and Schindl. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• e

  Pisc qualem video Tyrum quae plan∣tata est, &c.
• f

  So Zanchi. saith that some make it to be the meaning, and see Drus. and Oecol.
• f

  Chr. à Castro.
• g

  Zanchi.
• h

  Vicina & loco & moribus, Oecol.
• i

  See Mercer.
• k

  See Grot. on Isa. 23.1.
• l

  Drus.
• m

  The same we note out of Drus. orbam, ut sit adjectivum.
• n

  Castr. Trem.
• o

  Pagin. Calv. Pisc.
• p

  Tig. Munst. Cast. Jun. Trem. Grot. Pet. à Fig.
• q

  Bren.
• r

  Mercer.
• s

  See Theophylact.
• t

  Prima debet esse nominis Dei cura, ut omnia potius pereant, quo sua D••e gloria servetur, Merc.
• u

  Id. Propheta singularem habet vocationem, qua Divinitus jubetur huic populo male∣dicere & imprecari. Who shall bless, whom God hath curied?
• w

  On Psal. 69. and 109.
• x

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• y

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• z

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• b

  Ribera.
• c

  Rivet.
• d

  Precatio commi∣serationis in suam gentem plena. Dane.
• e

  Calv. Trem. Capito. Pet. à Fig. Jun. Pare. Rivet. Tarnov. Mercer latter notes. Grot.
• f

  Sic omnes expositores.
• g

  Tarnov.
• a

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• h

  Calv. Trem. Capito. Zanci. Rivet. Pet. à Fig. &c.
• i

  See Capito. Rivet.
• k

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as spoken by God. R. Tanchum. River.
• l

  Josh. 3.5.
• m

  R. Sol. Kimchi.
• n

  Chr. à Castro in his paraphrase.
• o

  Rib. Menoch. Tirin. who cites Jud. 3.7.19.
• p

  See Jun. Trem. Bp. Halls paraphrase.
• q

  Lyra, Z••••••i, Trem. Merc. Oecol. Rivet. Tarnov. &c.
• r

  Calv. Zanchi.
• s

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Col pro summo & praecipuo, Zanchi.
• t

  Tarnov. quae est peccatorum Ilias, imo quae est fons ali∣orum.
• v

  Calv.
• u

  See c. 4.13, 14.
• x

  Trem. Zanchi. per synecdochen.
• y

  Ab. Ezra.
• z

  Pare.
• a

  Petr. à Fig. Zanchi. Rivet. Ribera.
• b

  Tarnov. the MS. Arab. quite omits it.
• c

  See Joh. 4.21. &c.
• d

  See Zanc i. Gravius offendit Deum illius loci profanatio, Pare.
• e

  Zanchi. Plus est odisse quam irasci, quibus irascimur, caedimus, flagellamus, sed quos odimus occidimus si possumus.
• f

  So the LXII. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the fowlness of their condition.
• g

  Menoch.
• h

  See Concord. Hebr.
• i

  See Capito.
• k

  See Poole.
• l

  Trem. Grot. Pare.
• Merc. Drus. Pisc.
• Petr. à Fig.
• n

  Calv.
• o

  Pet. à Fig.
• m

  Id. and see Cyril.
• p

  See Jerom. Merc. Montan.
• q

  Rivet.
• r

  Calv. Zanchi.
• s

  Rivet.
• t

  Grot.
• u

  Capito Pise. see on v. 7.
• w

  Capito. Chr. à Castro.
• x

  Petr. à Fig.
• y

  Theophy. Tirin.
• z

  Chr. à Castr.
• a

  So Tarnov. also.
• z

  So the Eunuch is called a dry tree, Isai. 56.3.
• a

  See examples of their great desire of children in Rachel.
• b

  Lively. Drus.
• c

  Zanchi. River.
• d

  Radices suas arefecit. Trem.
• e

  Potius praedictio quam ma••edictio, Tarnov.
• f

  Pare.
• g

  Zanchi.
• h

  Kimchi.
• i

  Aben Ezra. Rivet. Grot.
• k

  Tarnov.
• Calv. Trem.
• Petr. à Fig.
• l

  Menoch.
• m

  Grot.
• n

  Pelican.
• o

  And see Levit. 26.33.