It is not by accident that these last words are not found in the collection of Psalms. The reason is indicated by the ??? There is a prophetic element in the lyric poetry of David wheresoever it refers to the future destiny of his house; but this prophetic element rises, here, at the close of his life, to pure prophetic inspiration and utterance, which stand on an equal footing with the prophecy of Nathan in 2 Sam. vii., and claim an equal authority.
Ver. 1. "_And these are the last words of David. David, the son of Jesse, prophesies, and the man prophesies who was raised up on high, the anointed of the G.o.d of Jacob, and sweet in the Psalms of Israel._"
It is substantially the same thing, whether we understand: "the last words of David" or "the latter words of David"--later in reference to xxi. 1. For even Ps. xviii., which precedes in chap. xxii., belongs, according to its inscription and contents, to the last times of David; it is, as it were, "a grand Hallelujah with which he withdraws from the scene of life." But, at all events, there is a closer connection with that Psalm; in it, too, David has in view the future destiny of his race, and we have here, in the last words, the prophetic conclusion of the lyrical effusion there. From this connection with chap. xxii., the closer limitation of the "words" follows. We learn from it that _holy_ words only can be meant. The solemn introduction, and the parallelism with the blessings of Jacob and Moses, fully agree with and confirm this our introductory remark regarding the chronological position of these "words."--There can be no doubt that, in this introduction, there is a reference to Balaam"s prophecy in Num. xxiv. 3,--and this goes far to prove how much David was occupied with the views which men of G.o.d had formerly opened up into future times:--"And he took up his parable and said: Balaam the son of Beor prophesies, and the man who had his eyes shut, prophesies: He prophesies who hears the words of G.o.d, who sees the vision of the Almighty, falling down and having his eyes open." The remarks which we made on that pa.s.sage find here also a strict application: [Pg 154] "Balaam begins with a simple designation of his person, and then, in the following members, adds designations of such qualities of this person as here come into consideration, and serve for affording a foundation to the ??? with which he opens his discourse." As ??? always has the signification, "word of G.o.d,"
"revelation," it can here be ascribed to David, as it was in the fundamental pa.s.sage to Balaam, only in as far as the word has been received by, and communicated to, him. The ??, "upon," "over," stands here for "on high,"[1]--those over whom David has been raised up being omitted in order to express the absolute sovereignty bestowed upon David, more, however, in his posterity, than in his own person.
(Compare Ps. xviii. 44: "Thou makest me the head of the heathen;" and in ver. 48: "G.o.d who avengeth me, and subdueth people under me.") _He who was raised up on high_--With the exception of the bodily ancestor and the lawgiver, of none under the Old Testament could this be with so much truth affirmed, as of David, the founder of the royal house, which, in all eternity, was to be the channel of blessings for the Congregation of the Lord, and to which, at last, all power in heaven and on earth was to be given. _The anointed of the G.o.d of Jacob_--Such is David, not only as an individual, but also as the representative of his race; compare Ps. xviii. 51. He is pre-eminently the anointed, the Christ of G.o.d.--???? plur. ?????? signifies, according to derivation and usage, not _song_ or _hymn_ in general, but the hymn in the higher strain, the skilful, solemn song of praise; compare my commentary on Song of Sol. ii. 12. David"s Psalms are called ?????? of Israel, because he sang them as the organ of the congregation, and because they were appointed to be used in public worship; compare Comment, on Psalms, vol. iii. p. vi. _Sweet in Psalms of Israel_ here finds its place only on the supposition that David, in his Psalms, spoke in the Spirit, Matt. xxii. 41-46; compare Commentary on Psalms, vol. iii. p.
vii. viii. The most distinguished excellence in poetry which is [Pg 155] merely human cannot form a foundation for the a.s.sertion in ver. 2.
But if, on the other hand, David be an often times tried organ of the Spirit for the Church, it cannot surprise us that in ver. 2 he even declares that, in the Spirit, he there foretells the future. Thus the ??? in our verse also has a good foundation.
Ver. 2. "_The Spirit of the Lord spake to me, and His word is upon my tongue._" That ??? refers to the communication which David promulgates in the sequel, and not to other revelations which he had formerly received, appears from its relation to the ??? in ver. 1. We should lose the new revelation announced in ver. 1, if ver. 2, and, hence, ver. 3 also--for the ??? there evidently resumes the ???--refer to divine revelations which David, or, as _Thenius_ supposes, even some other person, had formerly received.--?? is not "through me," for in that case the Participle would have been used instead of the Preterite; nor "in me," for that is contradicted by the parallel pa.s.sages in which ??? occurs with ?; but "into me," which is stronger than "to me," and marks the deeply penetrating power of the revelation by the Spirit; compare remarks on Hosea i. 2. Such being the case, the Preterite is quite in its proper place; for the inward revelation, the ??? ????
precedes the communication--the ??? ???. (On the whole verse, 1 Pet. i.
11, 2 Pet. i. 21, are to be compared.)
Ver. 3. "_The G.o.d of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me: a Ruler over men--just; a Ruler--fear of G.o.d._"
The omission of the verb, "will be or rise," is quite suited to the concise and abrupt style of the divine word. The mention of G.o.d, the Rock of Israel, shows that the revelation has a reference to what is done for the good of the people of G.o.d,--of His Church. For her good, the glorious Ruler shall be raised. (Compare the words, ??te??et?
?s?a?? pa?d?? a?t??, in Luke i. 54, as also ver. 68, and ii. 32.) The appellation. Rock of Israel, indicates G.o.d"s immutability, trustworthiness, and inviolable faithfulness; compare my comment, on Psalm xviii. 3, 32-47. The connection betwixt Ps. xviii. and the "last words of David" here also clearly appears. The fundamental pa.s.sage is Deut. x.x.xii. 4.--That _men_ must be conceived of as the subjects of dominion, is proved by Ps. xviii. 44, where David is made the head of nations, and people whom he has not known [Pg 156] serve him,--and by ver. 45, where the sons of the stranger do homage to him,--and by ver.
48: "Who subdues people under me."--_A Ruler_--_fear_ of G.o.d, _i.e._, a Ruler who shall, as it were, be fear of G.o.d itself--personified fear of G.o.d. We must here compare the expression, "This man is the peace," Mic.
v. 4, and, as to the substance of the expression. Is. xi. 2, "And the Spirit of the Lord rests upon him ... the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord." We might be disposed to refer this exclusively to the person of the Messiah, especially when those Psalms are compared which refer to a personal Messiah. But Ps. xviii.--which here receives, as it were, its prophetic seal--and especially the relation of ver. 3 and 4 to ver. 5, where David speaks of his house, prove that the Ruler here is, primarily, only an ideal person, viz., the seed of David spoken of in Ps. xviii. 51. Things so glorious can, however, be ascribed to it only with a reference to the august personage in whom that seed will centre at the end of days,--the righteous Branch, whom the Lord will raise up unto David (Jer. xxiii. 5), who executeth judgment and righteousness on earth, Jer. x.x.xiii. 15. David knew too well what human nature is, and what is in man, to have expected any such thing from the collective body, as such.
Ver. 4. "_And as the light of the morning when the sun riseth, a mourning without clouds; by brightness, by rain,--gra.s.s out of the earth._"
In the first hemistich we have to supply: will be His appearance in its loveliness and saving importance. The morning elsewhere also, especially in the Psalms (compare remarks on Ps. lix. 17; Song of Sol.
iii. 1), is used as the emblem of salvation. The condition of men before the appearance of the Ruler among them, is, in its dest.i.tution, like dark night.--The _brightness_ is that of the Ruler, as the spiritual Sun, the Sun of Salvation. (Compare Mal. iii. 20 [iv. 2], where righteousness is represented as the sun rising to those who fear G.o.d.) The _rain_--the warm, mild rain, not the winter"s rain which, in the Song of Sol. ii. 11, and elsewhere, occurs as an emblem of affliction and judgment--is the emblem of blessing (compare Is. xliv.
3, where "rain" is explained by "blessing"). The _gra.s.s_, which springs up out of the earth by means of sunshine and rain, is emblematical of the fruits and effects of salvation. [Pg 157] (Compare Is. xlv. 8, where, in consequence of the rain of salvation pouring down from the skies, the earth brings forth salvation and righteousness.) The pa.s.sage in Ps. lxxii. 6 is parallel, where Solomon says of his Ant.i.type, "He shall come down like rain upon the mown gra.s.s, as showers watering the earth." The figure of the rain making fresh gra.s.s to spring up is there likewise employed to designate the blessings of the Messianic time.
Ver. 5. "_For is not thus my house with G.o.d? For He has made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and kept; for all my salvation, and all pleasure,--should He not make it to grow?_"
The special revelation which David received at the close of his life (compare the remarks on ??? in ver. 1) is here connected with the fundamental promise in 2 Sam. vii., which was thereby anew confirmed to him. Those who, like _De Wette_ and _Thenius_, mistake the correct sense of vers. 3 and 4, are not a little perplexed by the "_for_"
at the beginning of this verse, and attempt in vain to account for it.--_Thus_, _i.e._, as it had been told in what precedes.--?????, "prepared," "ordered," forms the contrast to what is only half finished, indefinite, depending upon circ.u.mstances and conditions, admitting of provisions and exceptions. The extent to which all interposing obstacles were excluded, or rather, had been considered and calculated upon beforehand, appears especially from 2 Sam. vii. 14, 15, according to which, even the most fatal of all interpositions--the apostasy of the bearers of the covenant--should not destroy the covenant,--should not annul the gracious promise made to the race.
_Kept_, _i.e._, firm, inviolable, because given by Him who keepeth covenant and mercy, Deut. vii. 9; Dan. ix. 4. In 1 Kings viii. 25, Solomon prays, "And now, Lord G.o.d of Israel, keep with Thy servant David my father what Thou promisedst him when Thou saidst. There shall not be cut off unto thee a man from My sight to sit on the throne of Israel." The second "_for_" points out the cause of _kept_. _All pleasure_, _i.e._, all that is well-pleasing to me, all that my heart desires. The preceding ???? serves the purpose of qualifying it more definitely. The object of David"s desires is, accordingly, his salvation, the glory of his house.
Ver. 6. "_And wickedness, like thorns, they will all be driven away; for not will any one take them into his hands._"
The subject treated of in this verse is: the Ruler among men [Pg 158]
in His relation to His enemies. To those He is as formidable as His appearance is blessed to those who surrender themselves to Him. In Ps.
xviii. also, there is a celebration of the indomitable power which the Lord grants to David, His anointed, and to his seed against all their enemies; compare ver. 38: "I pursue mine enemies and overtake them, and do not turn again till they are consumed; ver. 39, I crush them and they cannot rise, they fall under my feet." In the cycle of Psalms from cx.x.xviii. to cxlv., David likewise speaks of the dangers which threaten his house from enemies, and the leading thought of Ps. ii. is: the Messiah as the conqueror of His enemies. The eyes of David were the more opened to this circ.u.mstance, the more he himself had had to contend against adversaries.--????? always means unworthiness in a moral point of view, "wickedness," "vileness." _Wickedness_ is here used in the concrete sense = the wicked ones, the sons of wickedness, Deut. xiii. 14. The wicked ones, the enemies of the Church, are compared to the thorns, on account of their p.r.i.c.king nature; and therefore their end is like that of thorns, they will be thrown aside like them. In Ezek. xxiv. 28, after the judgment upon the neighbouring people has been proclaimed, it is said, "And there shall remain no more a p.r.i.c.king brier everywhere round about the house of Israel, where their enemies are, nor a grieving thorn;" compare Num. x.x.xiii. 55; Song of Sol. ii. 2; Is. xxvii. 4; Nahum i. 10.--???, the _Partic. Hoph._ of ???, "thrust out," "put to flight" (compare Ps. x.x.xvi. 12), cannot be applied to the thorns, but only to the men. _Like thorns_, _i.e._, so that they become like thorns, of which the land is cleared. _For not will any one take them into his hands_--_Michaelis_: _Intractabiles sunt._
Ver. 7. "_And if any one toucheth them, he is filled with iron, and the staff of a spear; and they shall be utterly burnt with fire where they dwell._"
The two members of vers. 6 and 7 stand in an inverted relation to each other. In ver. 6, we have, first, the punishment described, and then their hostile nature, by which the punishment was called forth. In ver.
7, we have, first, the cause, and then the consequence. The thought in the first member is: every touch of them bears a hostile character.
_Iron_--instead of weapons fabricated of iron; comp. 1 Sam. xvii. 7; Job xx. 24, xli. 19 compared with vers. 18, 20; Jer. xv. 12. [Pg 159]
????, literally, "in the dwelling" (compare Ps. xxiii. 6, xxvii. 4; Deut. x.x.x. 20) instead of "where they dwell," shows that in their own borders they shall be visited and overtaken by retribution. ???? cannot have the signification, "without delay," ascribed to it by _Thenius_.
Footnote 1: ???, "below," "beneath," "under," is often used adverbially, _e.g._ Gen. xlix. 25. ??, in the signification "on high,"
occurs also in Hosea xi. 7,--less certainly in Hos. vii. 16. For, according to 2 Chron. x.x.x. 9, that pa.s.sage may be explained; "they return, not _to_," _i.e._, there is the mere commencement of conversion, but not the attainment of the end. On ???? Deut. xxviii. 36 is to be compared.
THE SONG OF SOLOMON.
An important link in the chain of the Messianic hopes is formed by the Song of Solomon. It is intimately a.s.sociated with Ps. lxxii., which was written by Solomon, and represents the Messiah as the Prince of Peace, imperfectly prefigured by Solomon as His type. As in this Psalm, so also in the Song of Solomon, the coming of the Messiah forms the subject throughout, and He is introduced there under the name of Solomon, the Peaceful One. His coming shall be preceded by severe afflictions, represented under the emblems of the scorching heat of the sun, of winter, of rain, of dark nights, and of the desert. Connected with this coming is the reception of the heathen nations into His kingdom, and this, through the medium of the old Covenant-people.
Thus far the first part, down to chap. v. 1. The subjects contained in the second part are, the sin of the daughter of Zion against the heavenly Solomon and the judgment; then, repentance and reunion, which will be accomplished by the co-operation of the daughters of Jerusalem, _i.e._, of the very heathen nations who had formerly received salvation through them; the complete re-establishment of the old relation of love, in consequence of which the daughter of Zion again occupies the centre of the kingdom of G.o.d; and the indissoluble nature of this covenant of love now anew entered into, in contrast with the instability of the former.
The Song of Solomon does not, strictly speaking, possess a prophetical character. It does not communicate any new revelations; like the Psalms, it only represents, in a poetical form, things already known.
It sufficiently appears from our former statement, that, in the first part of this book, not one feature occurs which did not form a part of those Messianic prophecies [Pg 160] which we can prove to have been known at the time of Solomon. In the second part, however, it is somewhat different. No corresponding parallel can be adduced from any former time to the view, that a great part of the people would reject the salvation offered to them in Christ, and, thereby, draw down judgment upon themselves. Yet, all that the book under consideration contains upon this point, is only the application of a general truth, the knowledge of which the Covenant-people had received at the very beginning of their history. A consideration of human nature in general, and more especially of Israel"s character, as it had been deeply and firmly impressed upon the people by the Mosaic law, joined to the ample experience which history had afforded in this respect, sufficiently convinced those who were more enlightened, that it could not be by any means expected--that, indeed, it was even impossible--that, at the coming of the Messiah, the whole people would sincerely and heartily receive Him, and do homage to Him. And there existed, on the other hand, at the time of Solomon also, the foundation for the doctrine of the final restoration of the people. For, even in the Pentateuch, the election of Israel by G.o.d is represented as irrevocable and absolute, and which, therefore, must at last triumph over all apostasy and Covenant-breaking on the part of the people.
The Song of Solomon, then, is no _apocalypsis_, no revelation of mysteries till then unknown. There is in it no such disclosure as is, _e.g._, that in 2 Sam. vii., on the descent of the Messiah from David; or, as is that in Mic. v. 1 (2), on His being born at Bethlehem; or even as is that in Is. liii. on His office as a High Priest, and His vicarious satisfaction. But, nevertheless, we must not imagine the case to have been thus, that the contents of the Song of Solomon could have originated merely from reflection on the part of Solomon. The truths. .h.i.therto revealed had too much of the character of mere germs to allow us to suppose that from them, and in such a way, we could account for the clearness and certainty with which they have been blended into one whole. Another element, moreover, must be joined to the historical ground--viz., an elevated condition of the soul, a "being in the Spirit,"--a breathing of the divine Spirit upon the human. History bears witness that such prophetic states, in the wider sense, were not strange to Solomon. It twice [Pg 161] reports about the Lord"s having appeared to him, 1 Kings iii. 5, ix. 2. From such an elevated state of soul, his dedicatory prayer, in 1 Kings viii., and Ps. lxxii., also originated.
We must content ourselves with these hints as regards Solomon"s Song.
As it moves throughout on Messianic ground, the Author must consider his commentary on this book (Berlin, 1853) as an appendix to the Christology.
[Pg 162]
MESSIANIC PREDICTIONS IN THE PROPHETS.
After the time of Solomon, the Messianic prediction was for a considerable time discontinued. It was first resumed, and farther expanded, by the Canonical prophecy which began under Uzziah. There cannot be any doubt that that which _appears_ as an interval was _really_ such. There is no ground for the supposition that any important connecting links have been lost. The Messianic prediction in the oldest canonical prophets is immediately connected with that which existed previously at the time of David and Solomon.
It is not a matter of chance that, whilst the blossom of prophetism appeared as early as Samuel, the canonical prophetism took its rise at a much later date. Nor is it the result of accident, that we do not possess any written prophecies, either by Elijah, who, at the transfiguration of the Lord, appeared as the representative of all the Old Testament prophets, or by Elisha. Nor is it merely accidental that, at the time of Uzziah, there appears all at once, and simultaneously, a whole series of prophets. All these things are connected with the circ.u.mstance, that it was only at that time that great events for the Covenant-people were in preparation,--that, only then, those catastrophes were impending which were to be brought about by the Asiatic kingdoms, and which kept equal pace with the sin of Israel, the measure of which was being more and more filled up. Canonical prophecy is closely linked with these catastrophes. It is called to disclose to the Church the meaning of these judgments, and, thereby, to secure to them their effects in all time coming. The Messianic predictions uttered by the prophets are likewise closely connected with the announcement of these judgments. Whilst false security was shaken by the threatenings, despondency--which is as [Pg 163] hostile to true conversion--was prevented by pointing to the future coming of the Saviour.
The prophets do not deliver the Messianic prediction in its whole compa.s.s, any more than do the writers of the Messianic Psalms. On the contrary, it is always only certain individual aspects which they exhibit. The writers of the Messianic Psalms take up those features which presented points of contact with their own lives and their own experiences, or at least the circ.u.mstances of their times. This is quite in keeping with the more subjective origin of Psalm-poetry. Thus David describes the suffering Messiah surrounded by powerful enemies, and who, after severe struggles, at length obtains victory and dominion. To Solomon, He appears as the Ruler of a great and peaceful kingdom, and he beholds the most distant nations reverentially offering presents to Him and doing Him allegiance. But the Prophets, in pointing out this or that feature, are not so much guided by their own experience, disposition of mind, and peculiar circ.u.mstances, as by the wants of those whom they are addressing, and by the effect which they are anxious to produce on them. When they have to do with pusillanimity, desponding at the sight of the heathen world as it seems to be all-powerful,--they then represent the Messiah as the invincible conqueror of the heathen world, who shall subject the whole earth to the kingdom of G.o.d. When they have to deal with pride, trusting in imaginary prerogatives of the Covenant-people, and boldly challenging the judgments of G.o.d upon the heathen,--they then represent the Messiah as Him who shall make a great separation among the Covenant-people themselves, and who shall be a consolation to the G.o.dly, while He brings inexorable judgments upon the wicked when they have to do with those who mourn in Zion, who through the inflicted judgments of the Lord have been brought to a deep sorrow on account of their sins,--they then represent the Messiah as Him who shall one day take away the sins of the land, who is to bear their griefs and carry their sorrows. Now, as canonical prophecy extends over several centuries, during which circ.u.mstances, wants, and dispositions the most diverse, must have taken place, and as the Messianic prophecy is in harmony with these, it displayed, more and more fully, its riches, and did so in a manner far more effective and vivid than it could possibly have [Pg 164] done had it been proclaimed in the form of a discussion or treatise. As the Messiah was thus represented from the most various points of view, and in the way of direct perception, and divine confidence,--as He was thus everywhere pointed out as the end of the development. He could not but become more and more the soul of the nation"s life.
In the Messianic announcements by the prophets, no such gradual progress in clearness and distinctness can be traced, as in those of the Pentateuch. The a.s.sertion that there existed with them at first, only a general hope of better times, unconnected with any person, rests on the unfounded hypothesis that Joel is the oldest among all the prophets,--and at the same time on the erroneous a.s.sumption that he was ignorant of a personal Messiah,--and, _further_, on the incorrect supposition that the prophets, who write only what presents itself immediately to their view, have not in their creed all that they omit to say. It is, _moreover_, opposed by the prospect of a personal Messiah held out in the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon. How very slender is the ground for inferring that, because many essential points are not touched upon by Hosea, Joel, and Amos, they, therefore, did not know them, is shown by the fact that neither do several among the later prophets--as Jeremiah and Ezekiel--touch upon them, although the previous more distinct prophecies of Isaiah were certainly known and acknowledged by them. We must never forget that it is from above that each of the prophets received his share of the prophetic spirit, and that this depended partly upon the measure of his receptivity, which might have been greater with the former than with the latter prophets,--and, partly, upon the wants and capacities of those for whom the prophecy was destined.
A central position, as regards the Messianic predictions, is occupied by Isaiah. Even his Messianic prophecies, however, when viewed detached and isolated, bear the character of onesidedness. He nowhere gives us a complete image of the Messiah. But, whilst the other prophets were permitted to give only single disclosures, he gives us, in the whole body of his Messianic prophecies, the materials for a full and entire image, although not the image itself. The Fathers of the Church have, therefore, rightly designated him as the Evangelist among the prophets.
But the transition to him from the Psalms and [Pg 165] the Song of Solomon could not be Immediate. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah form, as it were, the connecting links. Proceeding from the Messianic promise, in the shape which it had received at the time of David and Solomon, they give it a standing in the prophetic message, and infuse into it new life by means of the connection into which it is brought by them, and supplement it by adding single new features.
It is our intention to give an exposition of the Messianic pa.s.sages in the prophets, according to their chronological order. In placing Hosea at the head, we follow the example of those who collected the Canon, and who, regarding not so much the succession of years as that of the governments, may have a.s.signed the first place to Hosea, because he is the most important among the prophets at the time of Jeroboam in Israel, and of Uzziah in Judah, or because he really appeared first, and the prophecy in chap. i.-iii. is the beginning of written prophecies. The latter supposition most naturally suggests itself; the a.n.a.logies are in its favour, and no decisive argument has been brought forward against it.
THE PROPHET HOSEA.
GENERAL PRELIMINARY REMARKS.
That the kingdom of Israel was the object of the prophet"s ministry is so evident, that upon this point all are, and cannot but be, agreed.
But there is a difference of opinion as to whether the prophet was a fellow-countryman of those to whom he preached, or was called by G.o.d out of the kingdom of Judah. The latter has been a.s.serted with great confidence by _Maurer_, among others, in his _Observ. in Hos._, in the _Commentat. Theol._ ii. i. p. 293. But the arguments by which he supports this view will not stand the test. He appeals (1) to the inscription. The circ.u.mstance that, in this, there is mention made of the kings of Judah under whom Hosea exercised his ministry,--that they are mentioned _at all_,--and that they are mentioned _first_ and _completely_, while only one of the kings of Israel is named, [Pg 166]
proves, according to him--especially on a comparison with the inscription of Amos--that the prophet acknowledged the kings of Judah as his superiors. But this mode of argumentation entirely overlooks the position which the pious in Israel generally, and the prophets especially, occupied in reference to Judah. They considered the whole separation--the civil as well as the religious--as an apostasy from G.o.d. And how could they do otherwise, since the eternal dominion over the people of G.o.d had been granted, by G.o.d, to the house of David? The closeness of the connection between the religious and the civil sufficiently appears from the fact, that Jeroboam and all his successors despaired of being able to maintain their power, unless they made the breach, in religious matters also, as wide as possible. The chief of the prophets in the kingdom of the ten tribes--Elijah--by taking twelve stones according to the number of the tribes of Israel (1 Kings xviii. 31), plainly enough declared, that he considered the separation as one not consistent with the idea of the Jewish kingdom, and that therefore, in reality, it must at some future period be done away with; that he considered the government in Israel as existing _de facto_, but not _de jure_.
By none do we find this view so distinctly brought out as by Hosea.