John Calvin Commentary Hosea 1

This first verse shows the time in which Hosea prophesied. He names four kings of Judah—Uzziah, Jotham, Ahab, Hezekiah. Uzziah, also called Azariah, reigned fifty-two years; but after being stricken with leprosy, he did not associate with men and abdicated his royal dignity. Jotham, his son, succeeded him.

The years of Jotham were about sixteen, and about as many were those of king Ahab, the father of Hezekiah; and it was under king Hezekiah that Hosea died. If we now wish to ascertain how long he fulfilled his office of teaching, we must take notice of what sacred history says—Uzziah began to reign in the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam, the son of Joash.

By supposing that Hosea fulfilled his duties as a teacher, except for a few years during the reign of Jeroboam (that is, the sixteen years that passed from the beginning of Uzziah’s reign to the death of Jeroboam), he must have prophesied thirty-six years under the reign of Uzziah. There is, however, no doubt that he began his ministry some years before the end of Jeroboam’s reign.

Here, then, there appear to be at least forty years. Jotham succeeded his father and reigned sixteen years. Though it is a probable conjecture that the beginning of his reign is to be counted from the time he undertook the government after his father, having been stricken with leprosy, was isolated from society, it is still probable that the remaining time until his father's death should be included in our calculation. However, when we assume a few years, Hosea must have prophesied more than forty-five years before Ahab began to reign.

Add to this the sixteen years in which Ahab reigned, and the number will amount to sixty-one. There remain the years in which he prophesied under the reign of Hezekiah. Therefore, he must have continued his ministry for more than sixty years, and probably continued beyond his seventieth year of service.

Thus it appears with what great and invincible courage and perseverance he was endowed by the Holy Spirit. When God employs our service for twenty or thirty years, we often find it very wearisome, especially when we have to contend with wicked men and those who do not willingly accept the yoke but stubbornly resist us. We then instantly desire to be released and wish to become like soldiers who have completed their service.

Therefore, when we see that this Prophet persevered for so long a time, let him be an example of patience to us, so that we do not lose heart, even if the Lord does not immediately free us from our burden.

So much for the four kings whom he names. He must indeed have prophesied (as I have just shown) for nearly forty years under king Uzziah or Azariah, and then for some years under king Ahab (omitting for now the reign of Jotham, which was concurrent with that of his father), and he continued to the time of Hezekiah. But why has he particularly mentioned Jeroboam the son of Joash, since he could not have prophesied under him except for a short time?

His son Zechariah succeeded him. Later, the conspiracy of Shallum arose, who was soon destroyed. Then the kingdom became involved in great confusion, and at length the Assyrian, by means of Shalmaneser, led the ten tribes away captive, who became dispersed among the Medes. Since this was the case, why does the Prophet here mention only one king of Israel?

This seems strange, for he continued his teaching ministry until the end of his service and to his death. But an answer can be easily given: He wished to express clearly that he began to teach while the kingdom was intact. For, had he prophesied after the death of Jeroboam, he might have seemed to predict some great calamity based on the circumstances at that time. Thus, it would not have been prophecy, or at least, its credibility would have been much less.

People might have said, “Indeed! He now foretells what is evident to everyone.” For Zechariah flourished for only a short time, and the conspiracy mentioned before was a sure sign of an approaching destruction, and the kingdom was soon dissolved. Therefore, the Prophet testifies here in explicit terms that he had already threatened the people with future vengeance, even when the kingdom of Israel flourished in wealth and power, when Jeroboam was enjoying his triumphs, and when prosperity intoxicated the whole land.

This, then, was the reason why the Prophet mentioned only this one king: for under him the kingdom of Israel became strong, was fortified by many strongholds and a large army, and also abounded in great riches. Indeed, sacred history tells us that God, through Jeroboam, had delivered the kingdom of Israel, though Jeroboam himself was unworthy, and that he had recovered many cities and a very large territory.

Since, then, Jeroboam had expanded the kingdom, had become formidable to all his neighbors, had collected great riches, and the people lived in ease and luxury, what the Prophet declared seemed incredible. “Ye are not,” he said, “the people of the Lord; ye are adulterous children, ye are born of fornication.” Such a reproof certainly did not seem timely.

Then he said, “The kingdom shall be taken from you; destruction is near to you.” The people might respond: “What, to us? And yet our king has now obtained so many victories and has struck terror into other kings!” The kingdom of Judah, which was a rival, was then almost broken down, so there was no one who would have dared to suspect such an event.

So now we perceive why the Prophet here says explicitly that he had prophesied under Jeroboam. He indeed prophesied after Jeroboam's death and continued his ministry even after the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. But he began to teach at a time when he was an object of ridicule to the ungodly, who exalted themselves against God and boldly despised His threats as long as He spared and bore with them—which is always the case, as proved by the constant experience of all ages.

From this we see more clearly with what power of the Spirit God had endowed the Prophet, who dared to rise up against so powerful a king, to reprove his wickedness, and also to summon his subjects to the same judgment.

Therefore, when the Prophet conducted himself so boldly, at a time when the Israelites were not only made dull-witted by their great success but also utterly irrational, it was certainly nothing short of a miracle. This ought to contribute greatly to establishing his authority.

Thus we now see the design of the inscription contained in the first verse.

The Prophet here shows what charge was given him at the beginning: namely, to declare open war with the Israelites, and to be, as it were, very angry in the person of God, and to denounce destruction. He does not begin with smooth things, nor does he gently exhort the people to repentance, nor adopt a roundabout course to soften the harshness of his doctrine. He shows that he had used nothing of this kind, but says that he had been sent like heralds or messengers to proclaim war. The beginning, then, of what the Lord spoke by Hosea was this: “This people are an adulterous race, all are born, as it were, of a harlot; the kingdom of Israel is the filthiest brothel; and I now repudiate and reject them, I no longer own them as my children.” This was no common vehemence. From this, we see that the word beginning was not set down without reason, but deliberately, so that we may know that the Prophet, as soon as he undertook the office of teaching, was vehement and severe, and, as it were, fulminated against the kingdom of Israel.

Now, if it is asked, why was God so greatly displeased? Why did He not first recall these wretched men to Himself, since the usual method seems to have been that the Prophet tried, by a kind and paternal address, to restore to a sound mind those who had departed from the pure worship of God? Why, then, did God not adopt this ordinary course? But from this we gather that the diseases of the people were incurable. The Prophet, no doubt, distinctly intimates here that he was sent by God when the state of things was almost past recovery. We indeed know that God is not accustomed to deal so severely with men, except when He has tried all other remedies; and this may doubtless be easily learned from the records of Scripture.

The ten tribes, immediately after their revolt from the family of David, having renounced the worship of God, embraced idolatry and ungodly superstitions. They ought to have retained in their minds the recollection of this oracle:

The Lord has chosen Mount Zion, where He has desired to be worshipped; this, He said, is My rest forever; here I will dwell, for I have chosen it (Psalms 132:13–14).

And this prediction, we know, had not been repeated once or ten times, but a hundred times, so that it might be more firmly fixed in the hearts of men. Since, then, they ought to have had this truth fully impressed on their hearts—that the Lord would have Himself worshipped nowhere except on Mount Zion—it was monstrous stupidity for them to erect a new temple and to make the calves.

That the people, then, had so quickly fallen away from God was an instance of the most perverse madness. But, as I have said, they had reached the highest point of impiety. When God punished such great sins by Jehu, the people ought then to have returned to the pure worship of God, and there was some reformation in the land. However, they always reverted to their own nature; indeed, the event proved that they only dissembled for a short time, so blinded were they by a diabolical perverseness that they continually remained in their superstitions.

It is not, then, to be wondered at that the Lord made this beginning by Hosea: “You are all born of fornication, your kingdom is the filthiest brothel; you are not My people, you are not beloved.” Who, then, will not allow that God, by thundering in so dreadful a manner against this people, dealt justly with them, and for the best reason? The stubbornness of the people was so indomitable that it could be overcome in no other way. We now understand why the Prophet used this expression, The beginning of speaking which God made.

Then it follows, in Hosea. He had said in the first verse, The word of Jehovah which was to Hosea; he now says, נהושע, beusho, in Hosea. He adds that God spoke and said to Hosea, repeating the preposition used in the first verse. The word of the Lord is said to have been to Hosea, not simply because God addressed the Prophet, but because He sent him out with certain commissions, for it is in this sense that the word of God is said to have come to the Prophets.

God also addresses His word indiscriminately to others whomever He is pleased to teach by His word, but He speaks to and addresses His Prophets in a unique way, for He makes them the ministers and heralds of His word, and puts, as it were, into their mouth what they afterwards bring forth to the people. So Christ says that the word of God came to kings, because He constitutes and appoints them to govern mankind. If he calls them gods, he says, to whom the word of God came; and that psalm, we know, was written with a special reference to kings. We now perceive what this sentence in the first verse contains: The word of God came to Hosea. For the Lord did not simply address the Prophet in a common way, but furnished him with instructions, so that he might afterwards teach the people, as it were, in the person of God Himself.

It is now added in the second verse, The beginning of speaking, such as the Lord made by Hosea. Those who give this rendering, “with Hosea,” seem to explain the Prophet’s meaning coldly. The letter ב, beth, I know, often has this sense in Scripture; but the Prophet, no doubt, in this place represents himself as the instrument of the Holy Spirit.

God then spoke in Hosea, or by Hosea, for he produced nothing from his own mind, but God spoke by him; this is a form of speaking with which we shall often meet. On this, indeed, depends the whole authority of God’s servants: that they do not give themselves free rein, but faithfully deliver, as it were, from hand to hand, what the Lord has commanded them, without adding anything whatever of their own.

God then spoke in Hosea. It afterwards follows, The Lord said to Hosea. Now this, which is said the third time, or is three times repeated, is nothing other than the commission in different forms. He first said in general, “The word of the Lord which was to Hosea;” now He says, The Lord spoke thus, and He expresses distinctly what the word was to which He referred in the first verse.

Go, He says, take to yourself a wife of wantonness, and the children of wantonness; and the reason is added, for by fornicating, or wantoning, has the land grown wanton. He doubtless speaks here of the vices which the Lord had long endured with inexpressible forbearance. By wantoning then has the land grown wanton, that it should not follow Jehovah.

Here interpreters struggle greatly, because it seems very strange that the Prophet should take a harlot for a wife. Some say that this was an extraordinary case. Certainly, such a license could not have been tolerated in a teacher. We see what Paul requires in a bishop, and no doubt the same was required formerly in the Prophets: that their families should be chaste and free from every stain and reproach.

It would have then exposed the Prophet to the scorn of all if he had entered a brothel and taken a harlot for himself. For he is not speaking here of merely an unchaste woman, but of a ‘woman of wantonness,’ which means a common harlot. A ‘woman of wantonness’ is what she is called who has long accustomed herself to wantonness, who has exposed herself to all to gratify the desires of all, who has prostituted herself not once or twice, nor to a few men, but to all. That this was done by the Prophet seems very improbable.

But some reply, as I have said, that this ought not to be regarded as a common rule, for it was an extraordinary command of God. And yet it seems inconsistent with reason that the Lord should thus gratuitously make His Prophet contemptible. For how could the Prophet expect to be received when appearing before the public, after having brought such disgrace upon himself? If he had married a wife such as is here described, he ought to have hidden for life rather than undertake the prophetic office. Therefore, the opinion of those who think that the Prophet had taken such a wife as is here described is not probable.

Then another reason, utterly irrefutable, militates against them: for the Prophet is not only commanded to take a wife of wantonness, but also children of wantonness, begotten by whoredom. It is, therefore, the same as if he himself had committed whoredom. For if we say that he married a wife who had previously conducted herself with some indecency and lack of chastity (as Jerome at length argues in order to excuse the Prophet), the excuse is frivolous. He speaks not only of the wife but also of the children, since God would have the whole offspring to be adulterous, and this could not be the case in a lawful marriage. Thus, almost all the Hebrews agree in this opinion: that the Prophet did not actually marry a wife, but that he was commanded to do this in a vision. And we shall see in the third chapter (Hosea 3:1) almost the same thing described; and yet what is related there could not have been actually done, for the Prophet is commanded to marry a wife who had violated her marital faithfulness, and after having bought her, to retain her at home for a time. This, we know, was not done. It then follows that this was a representation exhibited to the people.

Some object and say that the whole passage, as given by the Prophet, cannot be understood as relating a vision. Why not? For the vision, they say, was given to him alone, and God was concerned with the whole people rather than with the Prophet. But it may be, and it is probable, that no vision was presented to the Prophet, but that God only ordered him to proclaim what had been given him in charge.

When, therefore, the Prophet began to teach, he started somewhat in this way: “The Lord places me here as on a stage, to make known to you that I have married a wife, a wife accustomed to adulteries and whoredoms, and that I have begotten children by her.” The whole people knew that he had done no such thing; but the Prophet spoke thus in order to set before their eyes a vivid representation. Such then was the vision: a figurative exhibition, not that the Prophet knew this by a vision, but the Lord had commanded him to relate this parable (so to speak), or this likeness, so that the people might see, as in a living portraiture, their depravity and treachery. It is, in short, an exhibition in which the thing itself is not only presented in words but is also placed, as it were, before their eyes in a visible form. The reason is added, for by wantoning has the land grown wanton.

We now then see how the words of the Prophet ought to be understood. For he assumed a character when appearing before the public, and in this character he said to the people that God had commanded him to take a harlot for his wife and to beget adulterous children by her.

His ministry was not on this account made contemptible, for they all knew that he had always lived virtuously and temperately; they all knew that his household was free from all reproach. But here he exhibited in his assumed character, as it were, a living image of the baseness of the people.

This is the meaning, and I see nothing strained in this explanation. At the same time, we see the meaning of this clause: By wantoning has the land grown wanton. Hosea might have said this in one word, but he had to address the deaf. We know how great and how stupid is the madness of those who delight in their own superstitions; they cannot bear any reproof.

The Prophet then would not have been listened to unless he had exhibited, as in a mirror before their eyes, what he wished them to understand, as if he had said, “If none of you can so know himself as to own his public baseness, if you are all so obstinate against God, at least know now by my assumed character that you are all adulterous and derive your origin from a filthy brothel, for God declares this concerning you. And as you are not willing to receive such a declaration, it is now set before you in my assumed character.”

That it should not follow Jehovah, literally, From after Jehovah, מאחרי, meachri. We here see what the spiritual chastity of God’s people is, and also what the meaning of the word “wantoning” is. The spiritual chastity of God’s people, then, is to follow the Lord. And what else is this “to follow” but to allow ourselves to be ruled by His word, willingly to obey Him, and to be ready and prepared for any work to which He may call us? When, then, the Lord goes before us with His instruction and shows the way, and we become teachable and obedient, look up to Him, and do not turn aside either to the right or to the left hand, but bring our whole life to the obedience of faith—this is truly to follow the Lord. And it is a most beautiful definition of the spiritual chastity of God’s people.

And we may also, from the opposite of this, learn what it is to grow wanton: we do so when we depart from the word of the Lord, when we listen to false doctrines, when we abandon ourselves to superstitions, when we, in short, wander after our own devices and do not keep our thoughts under the authority of the word of the Lord. But as to the word “wantoning,” more will be said in Chapter 2. I only wished now to briefly touch on what the Prophet means when he rebukes the Israelites for having all become wanton.

Prayer: Grant, Almighty God, that as You have once adopted us and continue to confirm this Your favor by calling us unceasingly to Yourself, and do not only severely chastise us but also gently and paternally invite us to Yourself and exhort us at the same time to repentance—O grant that we may not be so hardened as to resist Your goodness, nor abuse this Your incredible forbearance, but submit ourselves in obedience to You; that whenever You may severely chastise us, we may bear Your corrections with genuine submission of faith, and not continue untamable and obstinate to the last, but return to You, the only fountain of life and salvation; that as You have once begun a good work in us, You may perfect it to the day of our Lord. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

This verse was intentionally added; for the Israelites were so inflated with their present good fortune that they laughed at the judgment denounced. They indeed knew that they were well supplied with arms, men, and money; in short, they thought themselves in every way unassailable. Therefore, the Prophet declares that all this could not prevent God from punishing them.

“You are,” he says, “inflated with pride; you set up your valor against God, thinking yourselves strong in arms and in power; and because you are military men, you think that God can do nothing. And yet your bows cannot restrain his hand from destroying you. But when he says, I will break the bow, he mentions a part for the whole, for under one kind he includes every kind of arms. But as for what the Prophet had in view, we see that his only object was to break down their false confidence. For the Israelites thought that they would not be exposed to the destruction which Hosea had predicted, because they were dazzled with their own power and thought themselves beyond the reach of any danger, while they were so well fortified on every side. Therefore, the Prophet says that all their fortresses would be nothing against God; for in that day, when the ripe time for vengeance shall come, the Lord will break all their bows, he will tear in pieces all their arms, and reduce their power to nothing.

We are warned here always to take heed, lest anything lead us into a torpid state when God threatens us. Though we may have strength, though fortune (so to speak) may smile on us, though, in a word, the whole world should combine to secure our safety, yet there is no reason why we should congratulate ourselves when God declares himself opposed to us and angry with us. Why? Because, just as he can preserve us when unarmed whenever he pleases, so he can also strip us of all our arms and reduce our power to nothing. Let this verse then come to our minds whenever God terrifies us with his threats; and what it teaches us is that he can take away all the defenses in which we vainly trust.

Now, as Jezreel was the capital of the kingdom, the Prophet distinctly mentions the place, I will break in pieces the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel; that is, the Lord sees what kind of fortress there is in Samaria, in Jezreel, but he will make an end of you there, in the very midst of the land. You think that you have a place of safety and a firm position there, but the Lord will bring you to nothing, even in the valley of Jezreel.

The Prophet shows in this verse that things had become worse and worse in the kingdom of Israel: they sinned, keeping within no limits, and rushed headlong into the extremes of impiety.

He has already told us, by calling them Jezreelites, that they were from the beginning rejected and degenerate. It is as if he said, “Your origin has nothing commendable in it; you think yourselves to be very eminent because you derive your descent from holy Jacob, but you are illegitimate children, born of a harlot. A brothel is not the house of Abraham, nor is the house of Abraham a brothel. You are then the offspring of debauchery.”

But he now goes further and says that, as time advanced, they had continually been falling into a worse state, for this word, Loruchamah, is a more disgraceful name than Jezreel. And the Lord also here denounces His vengeance more openly when He says,

I will no more add to pursue with mercy the house of Israel. The Hebrew word רחם, rechem, means to pity and also to love, but this second meaning is derived from the first. For רחם, rechem, is not simply to love, but to show gratuitous favour. By calling the daughter, then, Lo-ruchamah, God intimates that His favour was now taken away from the people.

We know, indeed, that the people had been freely chosen, for if the cause of adoption is inquired for, it must be said that it was the mere mercy and goodness of God. Now then God, in repudiating the people, says, “You are like a daughter whom her father casts away and disowns because he deems her unworthy of his favour.” We now, then, comprehend the Prophet’s design. For, after having shown the Israelites to have been from the beginning illegitimate, and not the true children of Abraham, he now adds that, in course of time, they had become so corrupt that God would now utterly disown them and would no longer deem them as His house.

He, therefore, charges them with something more grievous than before, by saying, ‘Call this daughter Lo-ruchamah;’ for she was born after Jezreel. Here he describes by degrees the state of the people: that it continually degenerated. Though they were depraved at the beginning, they were now, after the lapse of some time, utterly unworthy of God’s favour.

I will no more add, the Prophet says, to pursue with favour the house of Israel. God here shows what constant forbearance He had exercised towards this people. I will no more add, He declares, as if the Lord had said, “I do not now rush out at the first heat of wrath to take vengeance on you, as passionate men are accustomed to do, who seize the sword as soon as any affront is given; I do not become so suddenly hot with anger. I have, therefore, until now borne with you; but now your obstinacy is intolerable. I will not then bear with you any more.” The Prophet, as we see, evidently intimates that the Israelites had for a very long time abused the Lord’s mercy while He spared them, so that now the ripe time of vengeance had come. For the Lord had, for many years, showed His favour to them, though they never ceased at any time to seek their own destruction.

Hence we learn, as was stated yesterday, that the Prophet’s vehemence was not hasty, for God had previously given warnings, more than sufficient, to the Israelites. He had also forgiven them many sins; He had borne with them until the state of things proved that they were altogether incurable. Since, then, the forbearance of God produced no effect on them, it was necessary to come to this last remedy: that the Lord should, as it were, with a drawn sword, appear as a judge to take vengeance.

He afterwards says, כי נשוא אשא להם, ki neshua asha lem. This sentence is variously explained. Some think that the verb is derived from the root נשה, nesche, with a final ה, he, which means “to forget,” as if it were said, “By forgetting, I will forget them;” and the sense is not unsuitable.

The Chaldean paraphraser wholly departs from this meaning, for he renders the clause, “By sparing, I will spare them.” There is no reason for this, for God, as the context clearly shows, does not yet promise pardon to them; this meaning, then, cannot stand.

Those who translate it as, “I will bring to them” (that is, the enemy), come nearer to the Prophet’s design, for נשא, nesha, signifies to take and also to bring into the middle. However, I prefer to embrace the opinion of those who consider that להם, lem, is placed here for אותם, autem. This is because the servile letter ל, lamed, often has the same meaning as the particle את, at, which is prefixed to an objective case.

Then the literal rendering is, “For, by taking away, I will take them away.” The Hebrews often use this mode of speaking, and the sense is plainer: “By taking away, I will take them away.” Some render the passage, “I will burn them,” but this explanation is rather harsh. I am satisfied with the meaning “to take,” but I understand it in the sense of “taking away.” Therefore, it is, “By taking away, I will take them away.”

And this is what the following verse confirms, for when the Prophet speaks of the house of Judah, the Lord says, “With mercy will I follow the house of Judah, and will save them.” The Prophet sets “to save” and “to take away” in opposition to each other.

We may then learn from the context what he meant by these words: that Israel had until now stood through the Lord’s mercy. It is as if he said, “How has it happened that you are still alive? Do you think yourselves to be safe through your own valour? No, My mercy has until now preserved you. Now, then, when I withdraw My favour from you, your ruin will be inevitable; you must necessarily perish and be brought to nothing. For as I have until now preserved you, so I will utterly tear you away and destroy you.”

A profitable lesson may be further gathered from this passage: namely, that hypocrites deceive themselves when they boast of the present favour of God and, at the same time, exult without any fear against Him. For as God for a time spares and tolerates them, so He can justly destroy and reduce them to nothing. But the next verse must also be joined.

This verse sufficiently proves what I said yesterday: that the Prophet was specifically appointed to the kingdom of Israel. For he seems here to speak favourably of the Jews, who, we know, had yet been severely and deservedly reproved by their own teachers. For what does Isaiah say, after having spoken of the dreadful corruptions which then prevailed in the kingdom of Israel?

‘Come,’ he says, ‘into the house of Judah; they at least continue as yet pure. There,’ he says, ‘all the tables are full of vomiting; they are drunken; there reigns also the contempt of God and all impiety’ (Isaiah 28:8). We see then that the Jews were not a virtuous people, about whom the Prophet has spoken so honourably.

For though the external worship of God continued at Jerusalem, and the temple, at least under Uzziah and Jotham, was free from every superstition, and also under king Hezekiah, yet the morals of the people, we know, were very corrupt. Avarice, cruelty, and every kind of fraud reigned there, and also filthy lusts.

The conduct, then, of that people was no better than that of the Israelites. Why, then, does the Prophet dignify them with so great an honour as to exempt them from God’s vengeance? Because he had his eye on the people to whom he was appointed a Prophet.

He therefore makes a comparison. He does not interfere with the Jews, for he knew that they had faithful pastors who reproved their sins; instead, he continued among his own hearers. But this comparison served especially to touch the hearts of the people of Israel, for the Prophet, we know, made this reference particularly for this purpose: to condemn fictitious worship. He now sets the worship at Jerusalem in opposition to all those superstitions that Jeroboam first introduced, that Ahab increased, and that all their posterity followed. Hence he says, I will show favour to the house of Judah.

That we may better understand the mind of the Prophet, it may be well to repeat what we said yesterday: The kingdom of Judah was then miserably wasted. The kingdom of Israel had ten tribes, the kingdom of Judah only one and a half, and it was also diminished by many slaughters; indeed, the Israelites had plundered the temple of the Lord and had taken all the gold and silver they found there.

The Jews, then, had been reduced to a very low state; they hardly dared to mutter. But the Israelites, as our Prophet will later tell us, were like well-fed beasts. Since, then, they despised the Jews, who seemed despicable in the eyes of the world, the Prophet beats down this vain confidence and says, With mercy will I follow the house of Judah. He explains that ‘the house of Judah seems now to be almost nothing, for they are few in number, nor are they very strong, and wealth does not abound among them as it does among you; but my favour shall dwell with them, and I will take it away from you.’

It afterward follows, And I will save them by Jehovah their God. Salvation is here set in opposition to the destruction which the Prophet mentioned in the last verse. But Hosea shows that salvation does not depend in the least either on arms or on any of the intervening means, as they say, of this world, but has its foundation only on God’s favour.

I will save them, he says—why? Because my favour will I show them. This connection ought to be carefully noted. Where the Lord’s favour is, there is life. Thou art our God, then we shall never perish, as it is written in the first chapter of Habakkuk (Habakkuk 1). Hence the Prophet here connects salvation with God’s gratuitous favour, for we cannot continue safe except as long as God is propitious to us. He has, on the other hand, declared that it would be all over with the Israelites as soon as God would take away His favour from them.

But he says, By Jehovah their God. An antithesis is to be understood here between the false gods and Jehovah, who was the God of the house of Judah. It is the same as though the Prophet said, ‘You indeed profess the name of God, but you worship the devil and not God.’

‘For you have nothing to do with Jehovah, with the God who is the creator and maker of heaven and earth; for He dwells in His own temple. He pledged His faith to David when He commanded him to build a temple for Him on Mount Zion; He dwells there between the cherubim, as the Prophets invariably declare. But the true God has become exiled from you.’ Therefore, we see how he here condemns all the worship that the Israelites then so highly valued. Why did he do so? Because it was not acceptable to God.

And this passage deserves to be noticed, for we see how stupid men are in this respect. When once they are persuaded that they worship God, they are seized by some fascination of Satan so as to become delighted with all their own delusions, as we see to be the case today with the Papists, who are not only insane, but doubly frantic.

If anyone reproves them and says that they do not worship the true God, they are instantly on fire—‘What! Does not God accept our worship?’ But the Prophet here shows by one word that Jehovah is not in any place, except where He is rightly worshipped according to the rule of His word.

I will save them, he says—How? By Jehovah their God; and God Himself speaks. He might have said, ‘I will save them by Myself;’ but it was not without reason that He used this circuitous mode of speaking; it was to show the Israelites that they had no reason to think that God would be propitious to them.

How so? Because God had chosen a habitation for Himself on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem. A fuller declaration afterward follows, I will save them neither by the bow, nor by the sword, nor by war, nor by horses, nor by horsemen. But this clause, by God’s favour, I will explain tomorrow.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as we were lost from our beginning, when You were pleased to extend Your hand to us and to restore us to salvation for the sake of Your Son; and that as we continue even daily to run headlong to our own ruin—O grant that we may not, by sinning so often, so provoke Your displeasure at length as to cause You to take away from us the mercy which You have until now exercised towards us, and through which You have adopted us. But by Your Spirit destroy the wickedness of our heart, and restore us to a sound mind, that we may ever cleave to You with a true and sincere heart; that being fortified by Your defense, we may continue safe even amidst all kinds of danger, until at length You gather us into that blessed rest, which has been prepared for us in heaven by our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We have to explain first this clause, I will save the house of Judah neither by the bow, nor by the sword, nor by war, nor by horses, nor by horsemen. What the Prophet had touched upon before is here more clearly expressed: that God has no need of foreign aids, for He is content with His own power.

But Hosea continues his contrast. For the people of Israel, possessing much carnal power, thought themselves, as they say, beyond the reach of darts. The kingdom of Judah, however, was exposed to all dangers, as it was not powerful in forces and arms.

The Prophet exposes this folly to contempt and says that safety depends on God alone, that men trust in their own valour in vain, and that there is no reason why the needy and destitute should despair of their safety, as God alone is abundantly sufficient to preserve the faithful.

The meaning then is that, although the destitute condition of the kingdom of Judah was an object of contempt to everyone, this would be no obstacle to its preservation through God’s favour, even if it obtained no aid from men.

And let us learn from this passage that our preservation by the Lord does not mean He never employs any natural means. Furthermore, when He has no recourse to them, He is abundantly sufficient to ensure our safety. Therefore, we ought to ascribe our safety to the Lord in such a way as not to think that anything comes to us through ourselves, or through angels, or through men.