poses the prophet to relate actions which hap pened, indeed, actually, but not outwardly—a needless refinement. Some, with Maimonides (11foreh Nevochim, part ii.), imagine it to be a nocturnal vision ; while others make it wholly an allegory, as the Chaldee Paraphrast, Jerome, Dru sins, Bauer, Witsius, Rosenmiiller, Kuinoel, and Lowth. The view of Hengstenberg, and such as have held his theory (Markii Diatribe de mr ore fornicatimium accipienda, etc., Lugd. Batav. 1696) is not materially different from the last to which we have referred. Both agree in condemn ing the first opinion, which Horsley so strenuously maintained. Hengstenberg, at great length and with much force, has arg-ucd against this hypothe sis (Christology), and Stahelin, Einleitztng, p. 212, rS62.. Besides other arguments resting on the impurity and loathsomeness of the supposed nuptial contract, it may be maintained against the external reality of the event, that it must have required several years for its completion, and that the im pressiveness of the symbol would therefore be weakened and obliterated. Other prophetic trans actions of a similar nature might be referred to. Jei ome (Conzment. in loc.) has referred to Ezek. iv. 4. It is not to be supposed, with Thomas Aquinas, that the prophet was commanded to commit fornication. The diyine injunction was to marry—` Scortum aliquis ducere potest sine pec cato, scortari non item.' Drusius (Comm. in loc. ap. Crit. Sac. tom. v.) Whichever way this ques tion may be solved ; whether these occurrences be regarded as a real and external transaction, or as a piece of spiritual scenery, or only (Witsii Miscell. Sac. p. 90) as a pictorial description, it is agreed on all hands that the actions are typical ; that they are, as Jerome calls them, sacramenta futurorum.
Expositors are not at all agreed as to the meaning of the phrase wife of whoredoms,' o+:1:r ; whether the phrase refers to harlotry before mar riage, or unfaithfulness after it. It may afford a solution of the difficulty if we look at the antitype in its history and character. Adultery is the appel lation of idolatrous apostacy. The Jewish nation was espousecl to God. The contract was formed at Sinai ; but the Jewish people bad prior to this period gone a-whoring. Comp. Lev. xvii. 7, in which it is implied that idolatrous propensities had developed themselves during the abode in Egypt : so that wrot may signify one impure prior to her marriage. C":171 "6', children of whore doms, may eithei mean children born by the wife' before her marriage, or the two sons and daughter afterwards to be born. According to some, they were not the prophet's own, and they followed the pernicious example of the mother. Spiritual adul tery was the debasing sin of Israel. Non dicitur,' observes Manger, cognovit uxorem, sed simpliciter concepit et peperit.' It is said, indeed, in verse 3, She bare him a son.' The word '6 is wanting in some MSS. and in some copies of the Septuagint, but may have been omitted to conform the clause to verses 6, S, and 9. According to Kurtz, the pro phet's children born after the marriage are the wit nesses and rebuke against the children of whole doms' adopted and brought into the house along with their mother, and also against their mother in her renewed infidelities ; while lIosea himself occupies the same position, yet more palpably and compassionately, towards his unfaithful and incor rigible spouse. Dr. Henderson affirms, on the
other hand, that the phrase wife of whoredoms' has reference only to adulterous courses after mar riage. He says, too, that the words, go take unto thee a wife,' are so plain and precise that they must refer to an actual event. Now, the reply is obvious, that prophetic figure or allegory is usually stated in diction implying reality, and that upon this verbal correspondence depend the truth and vividness of the description. In whatever way the transaction be taken, the lesson, at all events, is very apparent. The Israelites, who had been taken into nuptial covenant, very soon fell from their first love, and were characterized by insatiable spiritual wanton ness : yet their Maker, their husband, did not at once divorce them, but exhibited a marvellous long suffering toward them.
The names of the children being symbolical, the name of the mother has probably a similar signifi cation. 12621111 1l2i may have the symbolic sense of one thoroughly abandoned to sensual delights ;' 1U.1, completion (Ewald, Gram. 228); daughter of grape-cakes,' the dual form being expressive of the mode in which these dainties vvere baked in double layers. The Greek form, raXdOn, is apparently a corruption of the Hebrew r6n-r. The names of the children, t.:31-11.,, Jezrecl, riwn Lo-ruhamah, and ,n1) Lo ammi, are explained. It is generally supposed that the names refer to three successive generations of the Israelitish people. Hengstenberg, on the other hand, argues that wife and children both are the people of Israel : the three names must not be considered separately, but taken together.' But as the marriage is first mentioned, and the births of the children are detailed in order, some time elaps ing between the events, we rather adhere to the ordinary exposition.
The first child, Jezreel, may refer to the first dynasty of Jeroboam I. and his successors, which terminated in the blood of Ahab's house which Jehu shed at Jezreel. The name suggests also the cruel and fraudulent possession of the vineyard of Na both, which was in Jezreel,' where, also, Jezebel was slain so ignominiously (1 Kings XI, I ; 2 Kings ix. 2r). 13ut as Jehu and his family had become a F, corrupt as their predecessors, the scenes of Jezreel were again to be enacted, and Jehu's race must perish. Jezreel, the spot referred to by the pro phet-, is also, according to Jerome, the place where the Assyrian army routed the Israelites. The name of this child associates the past and future, symbo lizes past sins, intermediate punishments, and final overthrow. The name of the second child, Lorti hamah, ` not-pitied,' the appellation of a degraded daughter, may refer to the feeble, effeminate period which followed the overthrow of the first dynasty, when Israel became weak and helpless, as well as sunk and abandoned. The favour of God was not exhibited to the nation : they were as abject as impious. But the reign of Jeroboam II. was pros perous ; new energy was infused into the govern ment, and gleams of its former prosperity shone upon it. This revival of strength in that genera tion may be typified by the birth of a third child, a son, Lo-amrni, not-my-people' (2 Kings xiv. 25). For prosperity did not bring with it a revival ol piety ; still, although their vigour was recruited.