Forgotten Mercy, False Kingship, and Death Under Covenant Judgment

Hos 13:6 But prosperity made Israel proud, so that it forgot its God. Hos 13:6. “As they had their pasture, they became full; they became full, and their heart was lifted up: therefore have they forgotten me. ” This reproof is taken almost word for word from Deu 8:11. (cf. Deu 31:20; Deu 32:15.) כּמרעיתם, answering to their pasture, i. e. , because they had such good pasture in the land given them by the Lord.

The very thing of which Moses warned the people in Deu 8:11 has come to pass. Therefore are the threats of the law against the rebellious fulfilled upon them.

Hos 13:7-8 “And I became like a lion to them; as a leopard by the wayside do I lie in wait. Hos 13:8. I fall upon them as a bear robbed of its young, and tear in pieces the enclosure of their heart, and eat them there like a lioness: the beast of the field will tear them in pieces. ” The figure of the pasture which made Israel full (Hos 13:6) is founded upon the comparison of Israel to a flock (cf.

Hos 4:16). The chastisement of the people is therefore represented as the tearing in pieces and devouring of the fattened flock by wild beasts. God appears as a lion, panther, etc. , which fall upon them (cf. Hos 5:14). ואהי does not stand for the future, but is the preterite, giving the consequence of forgetting God. The punishment has already begun, and will still continue; we have therefore from אשׁוּר onwards imperfects or futures.

אשׁוּר, from שׁוּר, to look round, hence to lie in wait, as in Jer 5:26. It is not to be changed into 'Asshur , as it is by the lxx and Vulgate. סגור לבּם, the enclosure of their heart, i. e. , their breast. Shâm (there) points back to ‛al - derekh (by the way).

Hos 13:7-8 “And I became like a lion to them; as a leopard by the wayside do I lie in wait. Hos 13:8. I fall upon them as a bear robbed of its young, and tear in pieces the enclosure of their heart, and eat them there like a lioness: the beast of the field will tear them in pieces. ” The figure of the pasture which made Israel full (Hos 13:6) is founded upon the comparison of Israel to a flock (cf.

Hos 4:16). The chastisement of the people is therefore represented as the tearing in pieces and devouring of the fattened flock by wild beasts. God appears as a lion, panther, etc. , which fall upon them (cf. Hos 5:14). ואהי does not stand for the future, but is the preterite, giving the consequence of forgetting God. The punishment has already begun, and will still continue; we have therefore from אשׁוּר onwards imperfects or futures.

אשׁוּר, from שׁוּר, to look round, hence to lie in wait, as in Jer 5:26. It is not to be changed into 'Asshur , as it is by the lxx and Vulgate. סגור לבּם, the enclosure of their heart, i. e. , their breast. Shâm (there) points back to ‛al - derekh (by the way).

Hos 13:9-11 Hos 13:9 commences a new strophe, in which the prophet once more discloses to the people the reason for their corruption (Hos 13:9-13); and after pointing to the saving omnipotence of the Lord (Hos 13:14), holds up before them utter destruction as the just punishment for their guilt (Hos 13:15 and Hos 14:1). Hos 13:9. “O Israel, it hurls thee into destruction, that thou (art) against me, thy help.

Hos 13:10. Where is thy king? that he may help thee in all thy cities: and (where) they judges? of whom thou saidst, Give me king and princes! Hos 13:11. I give thee kings in my anger, and take them away in my wrath. ” שׁחתך does not combine together the verbs in Hos 13:8, as Hitzig supposes; nor does Hos 13:9 give the reason for what precedes, but shichethkhâ is explained by Hos 13:10, from which we may see that a new train of thought commences with Hos 13:9.

Shichēth does not mean to act corruptly here, as in Deu 32:5; Deu 9:12, and Exo 32:7, but to bring into corruption, to ruin, as in Gen 6:17; Gen 9:15; Num 32:15, etc. The sentence כּי בי וגו cannot be explained in any other way than by supplying the pronoun אתּה, as a subject taken from the suffix to שׁחתך (Marck, and nearly all the modern commentators). “This throws thee into distress, that thou hast resisted me, who am thy help.

” בעזרך: as in Deu 33:26, except that ב is used in the sense of against, as in Gen 16:12; 2Sa 24:17, etc. This opposition did not take place, however, when all Israel demanded a king of Samuel (1Sa 8:5). For although this desire is represented there (Hos 13:7) as the rejection of Jehovah, Hosea is speaking here simply of the Israel of the ten tribes. The latter rebelled against Jehovah, when they fell away from the house of David, and made Jeroboam their king, and with contempt of Jehovah put their trust in the might of their kings of their own choosing (1Ki 12:16.)

But these kings could not afford them any true help. The question, “Where” ( 'ehı̄ only occurs here and twice in Hos 13:14, for אי or איה, possibly simply from a dialectical variation - vid . Ewald, §104, c - and is strengthened by אפוא, as in Job 17:15), “Where is thy king, that he may help thee? ” does not presuppose that Israel had no king at all at that time, and that the kingdom was in a state of anarchy, but simply that it had no king who could save it, when the foe, the Assyrian, attacked it in all its cities.

Before shōpheteykhâ (thy judges) we must repeat 'ĕhı̄ (where). The shōphetı̄m , as the use of the word sârı̄m (princes) in its stead in the following clause clearly shows, are not simple judges, but royal counsellors and ministers, who managed the affairs of the kingdom along with the king, and superintended the administration of justice. The saying, “Give me a king and princes,” reminds us very forcibly of the demand of the people in the time of Samuel; but they really refer simply to the desire of the ten tribes for a king of their own, which manifested itself in their dissatisfaction with the rule of the house of David, and their consequent secession, and to their persistence in this secession amidst all the subsequent changes of the government.

We cannot therefore take the imperfects אתּן and אקּח in Hos 13:11 as pure preterites, i. e. , we cannot understand them as referring simply to the choice of Jeroboam as king, and to his death. The imperfects denote an action that is repeated again and again, for which we should use the present, and refer to all the kings that the kingdom of the ten tribes had received and was receiving still, and to their removal.

God in His wrath gives the sinful nation kings and takes them away, in order to punish the nation through its kings. This applies not merely to the kings who followed one another so rapidly through conspiracy and murder, although through these the kingdom was gradually broken up and its dissolution accelerated, but to the rulers of the ten tribes as a whole.

God gave the tribes who were discontented with the theocratical government of David and Solomon a king of their own, that He might punish them for their resistance to His government, which came to light in the rebellion against Rehoboam. He suspended the division of the kingdom not only over Solomon, as a punishment for his idolatry, but also over the rebellious ten tribes, who, when they separated themselves from the royal house to which the promise had been given of everlasting duration, were also separated from the divinely appointed worship and altar, and given up into the power of their kings, who hurled one another from the throne; and God took away this government from them to chastise them for their sins, by giving them into the power of the heathen, and by driving them away from His face.

It is to this last thought, that what follows is attached. The removal of the king in wrath would occur, because the sin of Ephraim was reserved for punishment.

Hos 13:9-11 Hos 13:9 commences a new strophe, in which the prophet once more discloses to the people the reason for their corruption (Hos 13:9-13); and after pointing to the saving omnipotence of the Lord (Hos 13:14), holds up before them utter destruction as the just punishment for their guilt (Hos 13:15 and Hos 14:1). Hos 13:9. “O Israel, it hurls thee into destruction, that thou (art) against me, thy help.

Hos 13:10. Where is thy king? that he may help thee in all thy cities: and (where) they judges? of whom thou saidst, Give me king and princes! Hos 13:11. I give thee kings in my anger, and take them away in my wrath. ” שׁחתך does not combine together the verbs in Hos 13:8, as Hitzig supposes; nor does Hos 13:9 give the reason for what precedes, but shichethkhâ is explained by Hos 13:10, from which we may see that a new train of thought commences with Hos 13:9.

Shichēth does not mean to act corruptly here, as in Deu 32:5; Deu 9:12, and Exo 32:7, but to bring into corruption, to ruin, as in Gen 6:17; Gen 9:15; Num 32:15, etc. The sentence כּי בי וגו cannot be explained in any other way than by supplying the pronoun אתּה, as a subject taken from the suffix to שׁחתך (Marck, and nearly all the modern commentators). “This throws thee into distress, that thou hast resisted me, who am thy help.

” בעזרך: as in Deu 33:26, except that ב is used in the sense of against, as in Gen 16:12; 2Sa 24:17, etc. This opposition did not take place, however, when all Israel demanded a king of Samuel (1Sa 8:5). For although this desire is represented there (Hos 13:7) as the rejection of Jehovah, Hosea is speaking here simply of the Israel of the ten tribes. The latter rebelled against Jehovah, when they fell away from the house of David, and made Jeroboam their king, and with contempt of Jehovah put their trust in the might of their kings of their own choosing (1Ki 12:16.)

But these kings could not afford them any true help. The question, “Where” ( 'ehı̄ only occurs here and twice in Hos 13:14, for אי or איה, possibly simply from a dialectical variation - vid . Ewald, §104, c - and is strengthened by אפוא, as in Job 17:15), “Where is thy king, that he may help thee? ” does not presuppose that Israel had no king at all at that time, and that the kingdom was in a state of anarchy, but simply that it had no king who could save it, when the foe, the Assyrian, attacked it in all its cities.

Before shōpheteykhâ (thy judges) we must repeat 'ĕhı̄ (where). The shōphetı̄m , as the use of the word sârı̄m (princes) in its stead in the following clause clearly shows, are not simple judges, but royal counsellors and ministers, who managed the affairs of the kingdom along with the king, and superintended the administration of justice. The saying, “Give me a king and princes,” reminds us very forcibly of the demand of the people in the time of Samuel; but they really refer simply to the desire of the ten tribes for a king of their own, which manifested itself in their dissatisfaction with the rule of the house of David, and their consequent secession, and to their persistence in this secession amidst all the subsequent changes of the government.

We cannot therefore take the imperfects אתּן and אקּח in Hos 13:11 as pure preterites, i. e. , we cannot understand them as referring simply to the choice of Jeroboam as king, and to his death. The imperfects denote an action that is repeated again and again, for which we should use the present, and refer to all the kings that the kingdom of the ten tribes had received and was receiving still, and to their removal.

God in His wrath gives the sinful nation kings and takes them away, in order to punish the nation through its kings. This applies not merely to the kings who followed one another so rapidly through conspiracy and murder, although through these the kingdom was gradually broken up and its dissolution accelerated, but to the rulers of the ten tribes as a whole.

God gave the tribes who were discontented with the theocratical government of David and Solomon a king of their own, that He might punish them for their resistance to His government, which came to light in the rebellion against Rehoboam. He suspended the division of the kingdom not only over Solomon, as a punishment for his idolatry, but also over the rebellious ten tribes, who, when they separated themselves from the royal house to which the promise had been given of everlasting duration, were also separated from the divinely appointed worship and altar, and given up into the power of their kings, who hurled one another from the throne; and God took away this government from them to chastise them for their sins, by giving them into the power of the heathen, and by driving them away from His face.

It is to this last thought, that what follows is attached. The removal of the king in wrath would occur, because the sin of Ephraim was reserved for punishment.

Hos 13:9-11 Hos 13:9 commences a new strophe, in which the prophet once more discloses to the people the reason for their corruption (Hos 13:9-13); and after pointing to the saving omnipotence of the Lord (Hos 13:14), holds up before them utter destruction as the just punishment for their guilt (Hos 13:15 and Hos 14:1). Hos 13:9. “O Israel, it hurls thee into destruction, that thou (art) against me, thy help.

Hos 13:10. Where is thy king? that he may help thee in all thy cities: and (where) they judges? of whom thou saidst, Give me king and princes! Hos 13:11. I give thee kings in my anger, and take them away in my wrath. ” שׁחתך does not combine together the verbs in Hos 13:8, as Hitzig supposes; nor does Hos 13:9 give the reason for what precedes, but shichethkhâ is explained by Hos 13:10, from which we may see that a new train of thought commences with Hos 13:9.

Shichēth does not mean to act corruptly here, as in Deu 32:5; Deu 9:12, and Exo 32:7, but to bring into corruption, to ruin, as in Gen 6:17; Gen 9:15; Num 32:15, etc. The sentence כּי בי וגו cannot be explained in any other way than by supplying the pronoun אתּה, as a subject taken from the suffix to שׁחתך (Marck, and nearly all the modern commentators). “This throws thee into distress, that thou hast resisted me, who am thy help.

” בעזרך: as in Deu 33:26, except that ב is used in the sense of against, as in Gen 16:12; 2Sa 24:17, etc. This opposition did not take place, however, when all Israel demanded a king of Samuel (1Sa 8:5). For although this desire is represented there (Hos 13:7) as the rejection of Jehovah, Hosea is speaking here simply of the Israel of the ten tribes. The latter rebelled against Jehovah, when they fell away from the house of David, and made Jeroboam their king, and with contempt of Jehovah put their trust in the might of their kings of their own choosing (1Ki 12:16.)

But these kings could not afford them any true help. The question, “Where” ( 'ehı̄ only occurs here and twice in Hos 13:14, for אי or איה, possibly simply from a dialectical variation - vid . Ewald, §104, c - and is strengthened by אפוא, as in Job 17:15), “Where is thy king, that he may help thee? ” does not presuppose that Israel had no king at all at that time, and that the kingdom was in a state of anarchy, but simply that it had no king who could save it, when the foe, the Assyrian, attacked it in all its cities.

Before shōpheteykhâ (thy judges) we must repeat 'ĕhı̄ (where). The shōphetı̄m , as the use of the word sârı̄m (princes) in its stead in the following clause clearly shows, are not simple judges, but royal counsellors and ministers, who managed the affairs of the kingdom along with the king, and superintended the administration of justice. The saying, “Give me a king and princes,” reminds us very forcibly of the demand of the people in the time of Samuel; but they really refer simply to the desire of the ten tribes for a king of their own, which manifested itself in their dissatisfaction with the rule of the house of David, and their consequent secession, and to their persistence in this secession amidst all the subsequent changes of the government.

We cannot therefore take the imperfects אתּן and אקּח in Hos 13:11 as pure preterites, i. e. , we cannot understand them as referring simply to the choice of Jeroboam as king, and to his death. The imperfects denote an action that is repeated again and again, for which we should use the present, and refer to all the kings that the kingdom of the ten tribes had received and was receiving still, and to their removal.

God in His wrath gives the sinful nation kings and takes them away, in order to punish the nation through its kings. This applies not merely to the kings who followed one another so rapidly through conspiracy and murder, although through these the kingdom was gradually broken up and its dissolution accelerated, but to the rulers of the ten tribes as a whole.

God gave the tribes who were discontented with the theocratical government of David and Solomon a king of their own, that He might punish them for their resistance to His government, which came to light in the rebellion against Rehoboam. He suspended the division of the kingdom not only over Solomon, as a punishment for his idolatry, but also over the rebellious ten tribes, who, when they separated themselves from the royal house to which the promise had been given of everlasting duration, were also separated from the divinely appointed worship and altar, and given up into the power of their kings, who hurled one another from the throne; and God took away this government from them to chastise them for their sins, by giving them into the power of the heathen, and by driving them away from His face.

It is to this last thought, that what follows is attached. The removal of the king in wrath would occur, because the sin of Ephraim was reserved for punishment.

Hos 13:12-13 “The guilt of Ephraim is bound together: his sin is preserved. Hos 13:13. The pains of a travailing woman come upon him: he is an unwise son; that he does not place himself at the time in the breaking forth of children. ” Hos 13:12 is a special application of Deu 32:34 to the ten tribes. Tsârūr , bound up in a bundle, like a thing which you wish to take great care of (compare Job 14:17; 1Sa 25:29).

The same thing is applied in tsâphūn , hidden, carefully preserved, so as not to be lost (Job 21:19). “All their sins are preserved for punishment” (Chald.) Therefore will pains overtake Ephraim like a woman in labour. The pains of childbirth are not merely a figurative representation of violent agony, but of the sufferings and calamities connected with the refining judgments of God, by which new life was to be born, and a complete transformation of all things effected (cf.

Mic 4:9-10; Isa 13:8; Isa 26:17; Mat 24:8). He cannot be spared these pains, for he is a foolish son (cf. Deu 32:6, Deu 32:28.) But in what respect? This is explained in the words כּי עת וגו, “for at the time,” or as עת cannot stand for לעת, more correctly “when it is time,” he does not place himself in, i. e. , does not enter, the opening of the womb. Mishbar bânı̄m is to be explained as in 2Ki 19:3 and Isa 37:3; and עמד, c.

ב as in Eze 22:30. If the child does not come to the opening at the right time, the birth is retarded, and the life of both mother and child endangered. The mother and child are one person here. And this explains the transition from the pains of the mother to the behaviour of the child at the time of birth. Ephraim is an unwise son, inasmuch as even under the chastening judgment he still delays his conversion, and will not let himself be new-born, like a child, that at the time of the labour-pains will not enter the opening of the womb and so come to the birth.

Hos 13:12-13 “The guilt of Ephraim is bound together: his sin is preserved. Hos 13:13. The pains of a travailing woman come upon him: he is an unwise son; that he does not place himself at the time in the breaking forth of children. ” Hos 13:12 is a special application of Deu 32:34 to the ten tribes. Tsârūr , bound up in a bundle, like a thing which you wish to take great care of (compare Job 14:17; 1Sa 25:29).

The same thing is applied in tsâphūn , hidden, carefully preserved, so as not to be lost (Job 21:19). “All their sins are preserved for punishment” (Chald.) Therefore will pains overtake Ephraim like a woman in labour. The pains of childbirth are not merely a figurative representation of violent agony, but of the sufferings and calamities connected with the refining judgments of God, by which new life was to be born, and a complete transformation of all things effected (cf.

Mic 4:9-10; Isa 13:8; Isa 26:17; Mat 24:8). He cannot be spared these pains, for he is a foolish son (cf. Deu 32:6, Deu 32:28.) But in what respect? This is explained in the words כּי עת וגו, “for at the time,” or as עת cannot stand for לעת, more correctly “when it is time,” he does not place himself in, i. e. , does not enter, the opening of the womb. Mishbar bânı̄m is to be explained as in 2Ki 19:3 and Isa 37:3; and עמד, c.

ב as in Eze 22:30. If the child does not come to the opening at the right time, the birth is retarded, and the life of both mother and child endangered. The mother and child are one person here. And this explains the transition from the pains of the mother to the behaviour of the child at the time of birth. Ephraim is an unwise son, inasmuch as even under the chastening judgment he still delays his conversion, and will not let himself be new-born, like a child, that at the time of the labour-pains will not enter the opening of the womb and so come to the birth.

Hos 13:14 But in order to preserve believers from despair, the Lord announces in Hos 13:14 that He will nevertheless redeem His people from the power of death. Hos 13:14. “Out of the hand of hell will I redeem them; from death will I set them free! Where are thy plagues, O death? where thy destruction, O hell! Repentance is hidden from mine eyes. ” The fact that this verse contains a promise, and not a threat, would hardly have been overlooked by so many commentators, if they had not been led, out of regard to Hos 13:13, Hos 13:15, to put force upon the words, and either take the first clauses as interrogative, “Should I ...

redeem? ” (Calvin and others), or as conditional, “I would redeem them,” with “ si resipiscerent ” (supplied (Kimchi, Sal. b. Mel. Ros. , etc.) But apart from the fact that the words supplied are perfectly arbitrary, with nothing at all to indicate them, both of these explanations are precluded by the sentences which follow: for the questions, “Where are thy plagues, O death?

” etc. , are obviously meant to affirm the conquest or destruction of hell and death. And this argument retains its force even if we take אהי as an optative from היה, without regard to Hos 13:10, since the thought, “I should like to be thy plague, O death,” presupposes that deliverance from the power of death is affirmed in what comes before. But, on account of the style of address, we cannot take אהי even as an interrogative, in the sense of “Should I be,” etc.

And what would be the object of this gradation of thought, if the redemption from death were only hypothetical, or were represented as altogether questionable? If we take the words as they stand, therefore, it is evident that they affirm something more than deliverance when life is in danger, or preservation from death. To redeem or ransom from the hand (or power) of hell, i.

e. , of the under world, the realm of death, is equivalent to depriving hell of its prey, not only by not suffering the living to die, but by bringing back to life those who have fallen victims to hell, i. e. , to the region of the dead. The cessation or annihilation of death is expressed still more forcibly in the triumphant words: “Where are thy plagues (pestilences), O death?

where thy destruction, O hell? ” of which Theodoret has aptly observed, παιανίζειν κατὰ θανάτου κελεύει. דּבריך is an intensive plural of debher , plague, pestilence, and is to be explained in accordance with Psa 91:6, where we also find the synonym קטב in the form קטב, pestilence or destruction. The Apostle Paul has therefore very properly quoted these words in 1Co 15:55, in combination with the declaration in Isa 25:8, “Death is swallowed up in victory,” to confirm the truth, that at the resurrection of the last day, death will be annihilated, and that which is corruptible changed into immortality.

We must not restrict the substance of this promise, however, to the ultimate issue of the redemption, in which it will receive its complete fulfilment. The suffixes attached to 'ephdēm and 'eg'âlēm point to Israel of the ten tribes, like the verbal suffixes in Isa 25:8. Consequently the promised redemption from death must stand in intimate connection with the threatened destruction of the kingdom of Israel.

Moreover, the idea of the resurrection of the dead was by no means so clearly comprehended in Israel at that time, as that the prophet could point believers to it as a ground of consolation when the kingdom was destroyed. The only meaning that the promise had for the Israelites of the prophet’s day, was that the Lord possessed the power even to redeem from death, and raise Israel from destruction into newness of life; just as Ezekiel (ch.

37) depicts the restoration of Israel as the giving of life to the dry bones that lay scattered about the field. The full and deeper meaning of these words was but gradually unfolded to believers under the Old Testament, and only attained complete and absolute certainty for all believers through the actual resurrection of Christ. But in order to anticipate all doubt as to this exceedingly great promise, the Lord adds, “repentance is hidden from mine eyes,” i.

e. , my purpose of salvation will be irrevocably accomplished. The ̔απ. λεγ. nōcham does not mean “resentment” (Ewald), but, as a derivative of nicham , simply consolation or repentance. The former, which the Septuagint adopts, does not suit the context, which the latter alone does. The words are to be interpreted in accordance with Psa 89:36 and Psa 110:4, where the oath of God is still further strengthened by the words ולא ינּחם, “and will not repent;” and לא ינחם corresponds to אם אכזּב in Psa 89:36 (Marck and Krabbe, Quaestion.

de Hos. vatic. spec. p. 47). Compare 1Sa 15:29 and Num 23:19.

Hos 13:15 “For he will bear fruit among brethren. East wind will come, a wind of Jehovah, rising up from the desert; and his fountain will dry up, and his spring become dried. He plunders the treasuries of all splendid vessels. ” The connection between the first clause and the previous verse has been correctly pointed out by Marck. “Hos 13:15,” he says, “adduces a reason to prove that the promised grace of redemption would certainly stand firm.

” כּי cannot be either a particle of time or of condition here (when, or if); for neither of them yields a suitable thought, since Ephraim neither was at that time, nor could become, fruit-bearing among brethren. Ewald’s hypothetical view, “Should Ephraim be a fruitful child,” cannot be grammatically sustained, since kı̄ is only used in cases where a circumstance is assumed to be real.

For one that is merely supposed to be possible, אם is required, as the interchange of אם and כּי, in Num 5:19-20, for example, clearly shows. The meaning of יפריא is placed beyond all doubt by the evident play upon the name Ephraim ; and this also explains the writing with א instead of ה fo d, as well as the idea of the sentence itself: Ephraim will bear fruit among the brethren, i.

e. , the other tribes, as its name, double-fruitfulness, affirms (see at Gen 41:52). This thought, through which the redemption from death set before Israel is confirmed, is founded not only upon the assumption that the name must become a truth, but chiefly upon the blessing which the patriarch promised to the tribe of Ephraim on the ground of its name, both in Gen 48:4, Gen 48:20, and Gen 49:22.

Because Ephraim possessed such a pledge of blessing in its very name, the Lord would not let it be overwhelmed for ever in the tempest that was bursting upon it. The same thing applies to the name Ephraim as to the name Israel, with which it is used as synonymous; and what is true of all the promises of God is true of this announcement also, viz. , that they are only fulfilled in the case of those who adhere to the conditions under which they were given.

Of Ephraim, those only will bear fruit which abides to everlasting life, who walk as true champions for God in the footsteps of faith and of their forefathers, wrestling for the blessing of the promises. On the other hand, upon the Ephraim that has turned into Canaan (Hos 12:8) an east wind will come, a tempest bursting from the desert (see at Hos 12:2), and that a stormy wind raised by Jehovah, which will dry up his spring, i.

e. , destroy not only the fruitful land with which God has blessed it (Deu 33:13-16), but all the sources of its power and stability. Like the promise in Hos 13:14, the threatening of the judgment, to which the kingdom of Israel is to succumb, is introduced quite abruptly with the word יבוא. The figurative style of address then passes in the last clause into a literal threat.

הוּא, he, the hostile conqueror, sent as a tempestuous wind by the Lord, viz. , the Assyrian, will plunder the treasure of all costly vessels, i. e. , all the treasures and valuables of the kingdom. On kelı̄ chemdâh compare Nah 2:10 and 2Ch 32:27. We understand by it chiefly the treasures of the capital, to which a serious catastrophe is more especially predicted in the next verse (Hos 14:1), which also belongs to this strophe, on account of its rebellion against God.

Hos 13:16 (Hebrew_Bible_14:1). “Samaria will atone, because it has rebelled against its God: they will fall by the sword; their children will be dashed to pieces, and its women with child ripped up. ” אשׁם, to atone, to bear the guilt, i. e. , the punishment. It is not equivalent to shâmēm in Eze 6:6, although, as a matter of fact, the expiation consisted in the conquest and devastation of Samaria by Shalmanezer.

The subject to yippelū (will fall) is the inhabitants of Samaria. The suffix to הריּותיו (its women, etc.) refers to the nation. The form הריּה is one derived from הרה, for הרה (Ewald, §189, c ). The construction with the masculine verb יבקּעוּ, in the place of the feminine, is an anomaly, which may be explained from the fact that feminine formations from the plur.

imperf. are generally very rare (see Ewald, §191, b ). For the fact itself, compare Hos 10:14; 2Ki 8:12; 2Ki 15:16; Amo 1:13.

Hos 14:1-3 After the prophet has set before the sinful nation in various ways its own guilt, and the punishment that awaits it, viz. , the destruction of the kingdom, he concludes his addresses with a call to thorough conversion to the Lord, and the promise that the Lord will bestow His grace once more upon those who turn to Him, and will bless them abundantly (Hos 14:1-8).

Hos 14:1. (Heb. Bib. v. 2). “Return, O Israel, to Jehovah thy God; for thou hast stumbled through thy guilt. Hos 14:2. Take with you words, and turn to Jehovah; say ye to Him, Forgive all guilt, and accept what is good, that we may offer our lips as bullocks. Hos 14:3. Asshur will not help us: we will not ride upon horses, nor say 'Our God' any more to the manufacture of our own hands; for with Thee the orphan findeth compassion.

” There is no salvation for fallen man without return to God. It is therefore with a call to return to the Lord their God, that the prophet opens the announcement of the salvation with which the Lord will bless His people, whom He has brought to reflection by means of the judgment (cf. Deu 4:30; Deu 30:1.) שׁוּב עד יי, to return, to be converted to the Lord, denotes complete conversion; שׁוּב אל is, strictly speaking, simply to turn towards God, to direct heart and mind towards Him.

By kâshaltâ sin is represented as a false step, which still leaves it possible to return; so that in a call to conversion it is very appropriately chosen. But if the conversion is to be of the right kind, it must begin with a prayer for the forgiveness of sin, and attest itself by the renunciation of earthly help and simple trust in the mercy of God. Israel is to draw near to God in this state of mind.

“Take with you words,” i. e. , do not appear before the Lord empty (Exo 23:15; Exo 34:20); but for this ye do not require outward sacrifices, but simply words, sc. those of confession of your guilt, as the Chaldee has correctly explained it. The correctness of this explanation is evident from the confession of sin which follows, with which they are to come before God.

In כּל־תּשּׂא עון, the position of col at the head of the sentence may be accounted for from the emphasis that rests upon it, and the separation of ‛âvōn , from the fact that col was beginning to acquire more of the force of an adjective, like our all (thus 2Sa 1:9; Job 27:3 : cf. Ewald, §289, a ; Ges. §114, 3, Anm. 1). Qach tōbh means neither “accept goodness,” i.

e. , let goodness be shown thee (Hitzig), nor “take it as good,” sc. that we pray (Grotius, Ros.) ; but in the closest connection with what proceeds: Accept the only good thing that we are able to bring, viz. , the sacrifices of our lips. Jerome has given the correct interpretation, viz. : “For unless Thou hadst borne away our evil things, we could not possibly have the good thing which we offer Thee;” according to that which is written elsewhere (Psa 37:27), “Turn from evil, and do good.

” שׂפתינוּ ... וּנשׁלּמה, literally, “we will repay (pay) as young oxen our lips,” i. e. , present the prayers of our lips as thank-offerings. The expression is to be explained from the fact that shillēm , to wipe off what is owing, to pay, is a technical term, applied to the sacrifice offered in fulfilment of a vow (Deu 23:22; Psa 22:26; Psa 50:14, etc.) , and that pârı̄m , young oxen, were the best animals for thank-offerings (Exo 24:5).

As such thank-offerings, i. e. , in the place of the best animal sacrifices, they would offer their lips, i. e. , their prayers, to God (cf. Psa 51:17-19; Psa 69:31-32). In the Sept. rendering, ἀποδώσομεν καρπὸν χείλεων, to which there is an allusion in Heb 13:15, פּרים has been confounded with פּרי, as Jerome has already observed. but turning to God requires renunciation of the world, of its power, and of all idolatry.

Rebellious Israel placed its reliance upon Assyria and Egypt (Hos 5:13; Hos 7:11; Hos 8:9). It will do this no longer. The riding upon horses refers partly to the military force of Egypt (Isa 31:1), and partly to their own (Hos 1:7; Isa 2:7). For the expression, “neither will we say to the work of our hands,” compare Isa 42:17; Isa 44:17. אשׁר בּך, not “Thou with whom,” but “for with Thee” ( 'ăsher as in Deu 3:24).

The thought, “with Thee the orphan findeth compassion,” as God promises in His word (Exo 22:22; Deu 10:18), serves not only as a reason for the resolution no longer to call the manufacture of their own hands God, but generally for the whole of the penitential prayer, which they are encouraged to offer by the compassionate nature of God. In response to such a penitential prayer, the Lord will heal all His people’s wounds, and bestow upon them once more the fulness of the blessings of His grace.

The prophet announces this in Isa 44:4-8 as the answer from the Lord.

Hos 14:1-3 After the prophet has set before the sinful nation in various ways its own guilt, and the punishment that awaits it, viz. , the destruction of the kingdom, he concludes his addresses with a call to thorough conversion to the Lord, and the promise that the Lord will bestow His grace once more upon those who turn to Him, and will bless them abundantly (Hos 14:1-8).

Hos 14:1. (Heb. Bib. v. 2). “Return, O Israel, to Jehovah thy God; for thou hast stumbled through thy guilt. Hos 14:2. Take with you words, and turn to Jehovah; say ye to Him, Forgive all guilt, and accept what is good, that we may offer our lips as bullocks. Hos 14:3. Asshur will not help us: we will not ride upon horses, nor say 'Our God' any more to the manufacture of our own hands; for with Thee the orphan findeth compassion.

” There is no salvation for fallen man without return to God. It is therefore with a call to return to the Lord their God, that the prophet opens the announcement of the salvation with which the Lord will bless His people, whom He has brought to reflection by means of the judgment (cf. Deu 4:30; Deu 30:1.) שׁוּב עד יי, to return, to be converted to the Lord, denotes complete conversion; שׁוּב אל is, strictly speaking, simply to turn towards God, to direct heart and mind towards Him.

By kâshaltâ sin is represented as a false step, which still leaves it possible to return; so that in a call to conversion it is very appropriately chosen. But if the conversion is to be of the right kind, it must begin with a prayer for the forgiveness of sin, and attest itself by the renunciation of earthly help and simple trust in the mercy of God. Israel is to draw near to God in this state of mind.

“Take with you words,” i. e. , do not appear before the Lord empty (Exo 23:15; Exo 34:20); but for this ye do not require outward sacrifices, but simply words, sc. those of confession of your guilt, as the Chaldee has correctly explained it. The correctness of this explanation is evident from the confession of sin which follows, with which they are to come before God.

In כּל־תּשּׂא עון, the position of col at the head of the sentence may be accounted for from the emphasis that rests upon it, and the separation of ‛âvōn , from the fact that col was beginning to acquire more of the force of an adjective, like our all (thus 2Sa 1:9; Job 27:3 : cf. Ewald, §289, a ; Ges. §114, 3, Anm. 1). Qach tōbh means neither “accept goodness,” i.

e. , let goodness be shown thee (Hitzig), nor “take it as good,” sc. that we pray (Grotius, Ros.) ; but in the closest connection with what proceeds: Accept the only good thing that we are able to bring, viz. , the sacrifices of our lips. Jerome has given the correct interpretation, viz. : “For unless Thou hadst borne away our evil things, we could not possibly have the good thing which we offer Thee;” according to that which is written elsewhere (Psa 37:27), “Turn from evil, and do good.

” שׂפתינוּ ... וּנשׁלּמה, literally, “we will repay (pay) as young oxen our lips,” i. e. , present the prayers of our lips as thank-offerings. The expression is to be explained from the fact that shillēm , to wipe off what is owing, to pay, is a technical term, applied to the sacrifice offered in fulfilment of a vow (Deu 23:22; Psa 22:26; Psa 50:14, etc.) , and that pârı̄m , young oxen, were the best animals for thank-offerings (Exo 24:5).

As such thank-offerings, i. e. , in the place of the best animal sacrifices, they would offer their lips, i. e. , their prayers, to God (cf. Psa 51:17-19; Psa 69:31-32). In the Sept. rendering, ἀποδώσομεν καρπὸν χείλεων, to which there is an allusion in Heb 13:15, פּרים has been confounded with פּרי, as Jerome has already observed. but turning to God requires renunciation of the world, of its power, and of all idolatry.

Rebellious Israel placed its reliance upon Assyria and Egypt (Hos 5:13; Hos 7:11; Hos 8:9). It will do this no longer. The riding upon horses refers partly to the military force of Egypt (Isa 31:1), and partly to their own (Hos 1:7; Isa 2:7). For the expression, “neither will we say to the work of our hands,” compare Isa 42:17; Isa 44:17. אשׁר בּך, not “Thou with whom,” but “for with Thee” ( 'ăsher as in Deu 3:24).

The thought, “with Thee the orphan findeth compassion,” as God promises in His word (Exo 22:22; Deu 10:18), serves not only as a reason for the resolution no longer to call the manufacture of their own hands God, but generally for the whole of the penitential prayer, which they are encouraged to offer by the compassionate nature of God. In response to such a penitential prayer, the Lord will heal all His people’s wounds, and bestow upon them once more the fulness of the blessings of His grace.

The prophet announces this in Isa 44:4-8 as the answer from the Lord.

Hos 14:1-3 After the prophet has set before the sinful nation in various ways its own guilt, and the punishment that awaits it, viz. , the destruction of the kingdom, he concludes his addresses with a call to thorough conversion to the Lord, and the promise that the Lord will bestow His grace once more upon those who turn to Him, and will bless them abundantly (Hos 14:1-8).

Hos 14:1. (Heb. Bib. v. 2). “Return, O Israel, to Jehovah thy God; for thou hast stumbled through thy guilt. Hos 14:2. Take with you words, and turn to Jehovah; say ye to Him, Forgive all guilt, and accept what is good, that we may offer our lips as bullocks. Hos 14:3. Asshur will not help us: we will not ride upon horses, nor say 'Our God' any more to the manufacture of our own hands; for with Thee the orphan findeth compassion.

” There is no salvation for fallen man without return to God. It is therefore with a call to return to the Lord their God, that the prophet opens the announcement of the salvation with which the Lord will bless His people, whom He has brought to reflection by means of the judgment (cf. Deu 4:30; Deu 30:1.) שׁוּב עד יי, to return, to be converted to the Lord, denotes complete conversion; שׁוּב אל is, strictly speaking, simply to turn towards God, to direct heart and mind towards Him.

By kâshaltâ sin is represented as a false step, which still leaves it possible to return; so that in a call to conversion it is very appropriately chosen. But if the conversion is to be of the right kind, it must begin with a prayer for the forgiveness of sin, and attest itself by the renunciation of earthly help and simple trust in the mercy of God. Israel is to draw near to God in this state of mind.

“Take with you words,” i. e. , do not appear before the Lord empty (Exo 23:15; Exo 34:20); but for this ye do not require outward sacrifices, but simply words, sc. those of confession of your guilt, as the Chaldee has correctly explained it. The correctness of this explanation is evident from the confession of sin which follows, with which they are to come before God.

In כּל־תּשּׂא עון, the position of col at the head of the sentence may be accounted for from the emphasis that rests upon it, and the separation of ‛âvōn , from the fact that col was beginning to acquire more of the force of an adjective, like our all (thus 2Sa 1:9; Job 27:3 : cf. Ewald, §289, a ; Ges. §114, 3, Anm. 1). Qach tōbh means neither “accept goodness,” i.

e. , let goodness be shown thee (Hitzig), nor “take it as good,” sc. that we pray (Grotius, Ros.) ; but in the closest connection with what proceeds: Accept the only good thing that we are able to bring, viz. , the sacrifices of our lips. Jerome has given the correct interpretation, viz. : “For unless Thou hadst borne away our evil things, we could not possibly have the good thing which we offer Thee;” according to that which is written elsewhere (Psa 37:27), “Turn from evil, and do good.

” שׂפתינוּ ... וּנשׁלּמה, literally, “we will repay (pay) as young oxen our lips,” i. e. , present the prayers of our lips as thank-offerings. The expression is to be explained from the fact that shillēm , to wipe off what is owing, to pay, is a technical term, applied to the sacrifice offered in fulfilment of a vow (Deu 23:22; Psa 22:26; Psa 50:14, etc.) , and that pârı̄m , young oxen, were the best animals for thank-offerings (Exo 24:5).

As such thank-offerings, i. e. , in the place of the best animal sacrifices, they would offer their lips, i. e. , their prayers, to God (cf. Psa 51:17-19; Psa 69:31-32). In the Sept. rendering, ἀποδώσομεν καρπὸν χείλεων, to which there is an allusion in Heb 13:15, פּרים has been confounded with פּרי, as Jerome has already observed. but turning to God requires renunciation of the world, of its power, and of all idolatry.

Rebellious Israel placed its reliance upon Assyria and Egypt (Hos 5:13; Hos 7:11; Hos 8:9). It will do this no longer. The riding upon horses refers partly to the military force of Egypt (Isa 31:1), and partly to their own (Hos 1:7; Isa 2:7). For the expression, “neither will we say to the work of our hands,” compare Isa 42:17; Isa 44:17. אשׁר בּך, not “Thou with whom,” but “for with Thee” ( 'ăsher as in Deu 3:24).

The thought, “with Thee the orphan findeth compassion,” as God promises in His word (Exo 22:22; Deu 10:18), serves not only as a reason for the resolution no longer to call the manufacture of their own hands God, but generally for the whole of the penitential prayer, which they are encouraged to offer by the compassionate nature of God. In response to such a penitential prayer, the Lord will heal all His people’s wounds, and bestow upon them once more the fulness of the blessings of His grace.

The prophet announces this in Isa 44:4-8 as the answer from the Lord.

Hos 14:4-8 “I will heal their apostasy, will love them freely: for my wrath has turned away from it. Hos 14:5. I will be like dew for Israel: it shall blossom like the lily, and strike its roots like Lebanon. Hos 14:6. Its shoots shall go forth, and its splendour shall become like the olive-tree, and its smell like Lebanon. Hos 14:7. They that dwell in its shadow shall give life to corn again; and shall blossom like the vine: whose glory is like the wine of Lebanon.

Hos 14:8. Ephraim: What have I further with the idols? I hear, and look upon him: I, like a bursting cypress, in me is thy fruit found. ” The Lord promises first of all to heal their apostasy, i. e. , all the injuries which have been inflicted by their apostasy from Him, and to love them with perfect spontaneity ( nedâbhâh an adverbial accusative, promta animi voluntate ), since His anger, which was kindled on account of its idolatry, had now turned away from it ( mimmennū , i.

e. , from Israel). The reading mimmennı̄ (from me), which the Babylonian Codices have after the Masora, appears to have originated in a misunderstanding of Jer 2:35. This love of the Lord will manifest itself in abundant blessing. Jehovah will be to Israel a refreshing, enlivening dew (cf. Isa 26:19), through which it will blossom splendidly, strike deep roots, and spread its shoots far and wide.

“Like the lily:” the fragrant white lily, which is very common in Palestine, and grows without cultivation, and “which is unsurpassed in its fecundity, often producing fifty bulbs from a single root” (Pliny h. n. xxi. 5). “Strike roots like Lebanon,” i. e. , not merely the deeply rooted forest of Lebanon, but the mountain itself, as one of the “foundations of the earth” (Mic 6:2).

The deeper the roots, the more the branches spread and cover themselves with splendid green foliage, like the evergreen and fruitful olive-tree (Jer 11:16; Ps. 52:10). The smell is like Lebanon, which is rendered fragrant by its cedars and spices (Sol 4:11). The meaning of the several features in the picture has been well explained by Rosenmüller thus: “The rooting indicates stability: the spreading of the branches , propagation and the multitude of inhabitants; the splendour of the olive , beauty and glory, and that constant and lasting; the fragrance , hilarity and loveliness.

” In Hos 14:7 a somewhat different turn is given to the figure. The comparison of the growth and flourishing of Israel to the lily and to a tree, that strikes deep roots and spreads its green branches far and wide, passes imperceptibly into the idea that Israel is itself the tree beneath whose shade the members of the nation flourish with freshness and vigour.

ישׁוּבוּ is to be connected adverbially with יהיּוּ. Those who sit beneath the shade of Israel, the tree that is bursting into leaf, will revive corn, i. e. , cause it to return to life, or produce it for nourishment, satiety, and strengthening. Yea, they themselves will sprout like the vine, whose remembrance is, i. e. , which has a renown, like the wine of Lebanon, which has been celebrated from time immemorial (cf.

Plin. h. n. xiv. 7; Oedmann, Verbm. Sammlung aus der Naturkunde , ii. p. 193; and Rosenmüller, Bibl. Althk. iv. 1, p. 217). The divine promise closes in Hos 14:9 with an appeal to Israel to renounce idols altogether, and hold fast by the Lord alone as the source of its life. Ephraim is a vocative, and is followed immediately by what the Lord has to say to Ephraim, so that we may supply memento in thought.

מה־לּי עוד לע, what have I yet to do with idols? (for this phrase, compare Jer 2:18); that is to say, not “I have now to contend with thee on account of the idols (Schmieder), nor “do not place them by my side any more” (Ros.) ; but, “I will have nothing more to do with idols,” which also implies that Ephraim is to have nothing more to do with them. To this there is appended a notice of what God has done and will do for Israel, to which greater prominence is given by the emphatic אני: I , I hearken ( ‛ânı̄thı̄ a prophetic perfect), and look upon him.

שׁוּר, to look about for a person, to be anxious about him, or care for him, as in Job 24:15. The suffix refers to Ephraim. In the last clause, God compares Himself to a cypress becoming green, not only to denote the shelter which He will afford to the people, but as the true tree of life, on which the nation finds its fruits - a fruit which nourishes and invigorates the spiritual life of the nation.

The salvation which this promise sets before the people when they shall return to the Lord, is indeed depicted, according to the circumstances and peculiar views prevailing under the Old Testament, as earthly growth and prosperity; but its real nature is such, that it will receive a spiritual fulfilment in those Israelites alone who are brought to belief in Jesus Christ.