« PreviousContinue »
the Vatican, in the Vulgate, in the Chaldee, in Luther's Latin translation, in Calvin's, in our Public Translation, and in Archbishop Newcombe's; but neglected by Castalio, Jun. and Trem. and by Houbigant. It must be confessed, that in some instances the prefix – seems used as equivalent to Sa. But its most proper meaning is indisputably a mean between the opposite senses of you and 5x, from and towards, denoting rest, residence, or continuance in.' Hence it is the proper preposition of the instrument, as that in which the active power of the first efficient is placed. And in such studied change from one mode of expression to another, as occurs in this passage, it is reasonable to suppose, that each is used in its distinct and appropriate meaning. Some passages indeed have been alleged, in which > after verbs of speaking to, might be rendered by the Latin 'cum,' or the English with. As in Numbers xii, 8. “. With him  will I speak mouth to mouth.” But in this, and every instance of the same kind except one, the parties in the discourse, or the supposed discourse, are God and the prophet. And in every discourse of God with a prophet, much more is intended than the prophet's in. formation; the prophet is always the vehicle of a divinė message to the people. Even in this text of Hosea, where what is said by God seems immedi. ately to concern the prophet individually, being a command of something to be done by him in the economy of his domestic life; yet the act command. ed being of public interest and importance, as it was typical of the case between God and the people of Israel ; being commanded for that very reason, as a method of public admonition and denunciation; even in this instance, which in the first face of it has much the appearance of a private affair of the prophet's, it was rather by than to Hosea that Jehovah spake; and the change in the original from 5x to 3, and back again, is not immaterial, and ought to be preserved in the translation.
Some imagine, that >, in this and similar pas. sages, describes the manner of the divine communia cation with the holy prophets, not by an audible voice, but by internal suggestions. “ Loqui in aliquo dicitur Deus, cum ea, quæ agi vult, ejus cordi, ut agantur, inspirat.” Eucher. de quæst. V. et N. T. If this be the force of 3, it renders neither “to' nor .by,' but within.' “ The beginning of the word of Jehovah within Hosea." - But I cannot but think, that in all this extraordinary intercourse which God vouchsafed to hold with man, the internal suggestion must always have been accompanied, not perhaps with an audible voice, but with some external sign, by which the prophet might with certainty distinguish the revelations of the Holy Spirit from thoughts arising in his own mind : and I very much doubt, whether internal suggestion alone was a method of communication. have no doubt, therefore, that by,' rather than within,' is the proper rendering of > in this passage.
(B) -" was in this manner.' This I take to be the force of the copula ' prefixed to 1989. And so it is taken by Castalio and Houbigant. The ' is often to be taken as a particle of specification, equivalent to scilicet, nempe, or nimirum. A very remarkable instance of this use of it we find in Job's memorable confession of his faith in the Redeemer to come. Job xix, 23—27.
23 Oh that my words were now written!
Oh that they were inscribed in a register! 24 That, with a pen of iron or lead,
For everlasting they were graven on a rock! After this wish, prefixed to YX, at the beginning of the next verse, very ill rendered for,' in our Public Translation, specifies the words, which Job would have recorded; the matter of the inscription.
25 1197 1989, Namely, [these words, ] I know the Living One
my Redeemer, &c. to the end of ver. 27.
Vide Nold. not. 1208,
(C) _" is perpetually playing the wantón,"
. -“to whore whores." This construction, in which the finite verb is connected with its own infinitive, for the most part expresses the
perpetual repetition of the action, as a matter of daily practice and habit.
Buxtorf's distinction, that when the infinitive is put first, this construction expresses the greater certainty and evidence of the thing ;* but when the infinitive follows, the continuance and frequent practice, seems to me to have no foundation. I think that, in either position of the infinitive, greater certainty, or greater frequency may be expressed, as the subject matter may require.
* See Thes. Gram. Lib. II. cap. 16. Reg. 2.
(D) " I will visit the blood of Jezraël upon the house of Jehu."
Jezraël, the mystical name of the prophet's son, must be familiar to all who are conversant in the Holy Scriptures, as the name of a city in the tribe of Issachar, and of a valley or plain, in which the city stood; the city, famous for its vineyard, which cost the rightful owner, the unfortunate Naboth, his life ; and, by the righteous judgment of God, gave occasion to the downfal of the royal house of Ahab; the plain, one of the finest parts of the whole land of Canaan, if we may judge from the partiality of the kings of Israel for the spot, who all fixed their residence in one or other of its numerous cities. Modern expositors, entirely forgetting the prophet's son, have thought of nothing in this passage but the place; the city, or the plain. A mistake into which perhaps they have the more easily fallen, by reason of the explicit mention of the place at the end of the subsequent verse.
But if the word Jezraël be taken here as the name of a place, the threat of " avenging, or visiting, upon the house of Jehu the blood of Jezraël,” will signi. fy, that the family of Jehu was to be punished for