John Calvin Commentary Hosea 12

The Prophet here speaks out strongly against the vain hopes of the people, for they were so inflated with arrogance that they despised all instruction and all admonitions. It was therefore necessary, in the first place, to correct this vice, and therefore he says, Ephraim feeds on wind. For when one gulps the wind, he seems indeed to fill his mouth, his throat, his chest, and his whole stomach; but there is nothing but air, no nourishment.

So he says that Israel indeed placed much confidence in their cunning schemes, but it was only to feed on the wind. They dreamed that they were happy when they secured alliances, when they had both the Assyrians and the Egyptians as their allies. They are only gusts, says the Prophet. Indeed, he says, they are harmful gusts; for by the East he understands the east wind, which blows from the rising of the sun; and this, as they say, is in Judea a dry and often a stormy wind.

Other winds either bring rain or some other advantage, but this wind brings nothing but drought and storms. Thus it appears that the Prophet meant that Israel, through this their vain confidence, brought upon themselves many sorrows and always remained void and empty. Ephraim then feeds on the wind, and further, he follows after the east wind.

Hosea explains his meaning afterwards more clearly when he says, He daily multiplies falsehood and desolation. By "falsehood," I have no doubt he alludes to the deceptions by which the people deceived themselves, just as hypocrites do, who, by sharpening their wits to deceive God, involve themselves in many fatal snares. So Israel is also said to have multiplied falsehood, for they made themselves so obstinate as to become quite hardened against God’s teaching.

This obstinacy is called falsehood for this reason: because unbelieving men, as we see, fabricate many excuses for themselves. Though these are deceptions, they still think themselves safe against all God's threatenings, provided they set up some unknown thing which they believe will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, the Prophet repeats again that there was nothing but falsehood in all their cunning decrees.

He then emphasizes the point further, saying that it was desolation—that is, the cause of desolation. He first derides the people's vain confidence because they thought they could blind God's eyes with their vain disguises. “This is falsehood,” he says, “this is deception.” Then he presses them more severely and says, “This is your perdition: you will at last perceive that you have gained nothing by your plans but destruction.”

How so? Because they made a covenant. I take this latter clause as explanatory. For if the Prophet had only spoken generally, the people's impiety would not have been sufficiently exposed. The masks of complacent men must be torn away, and their crimes, so to speak, depicted, so that they may be ashamed. For unless they are, so to speak, drawn out before the public and their wickedness exposed to everyone's view, they will always hide themselves in their secret places.

This, then, is the reason why the Prophet here specifically points out their deceptions, which he had mentioned before. Behold, he says, they made a covenant with the Assyrian, and carry their oil into Egypt. That is, they seek the friendship of the Assyrian on one side, and on the other, they try to win over the Egyptians with great persistence. Indeed, they do not spare their own goods, for they carry presents to win them over.

We now understand, then, how Israel had multiplied falsehood and desolation: they implicated themselves in unlawful agreements. But why it was unlawful for them to turn to the Assyrians and Egyptians, we have explained elsewhere, and it is not necessary here to repeat at length what has been said.

God wished the people to be under His protection. When God promised to be the defender of their safety, they should have been satisfied with His protection alone. But when they turned to Egypt and Assyria, it was clear evidence of unbelief, for it was the same as denying that God's power was sufficient for them.

We also know that the Israelites never went to Assyria or Egypt except when they plotted the destruction of their own brothers, for they often worked to overturn the kingdom of Judah. They only sought allies to satisfy their own cruelty.

However, this one reason was abundantly sufficient to condemn them: they fortified themselves with foreign aid when God was willing to keep them, so to speak, enclosed under His own wings.

Therefore, whenever we attempt to provide for ourselves by unlawful means, it is the same as if we denied God. For He calls and invites us to come under His protection. But when our thoughts run here and there, and we seek some vain help, we grievously dishonor God. It is, so to speak, to flee to Egypt or Assyria. And the teaching of this verse ought to be applied for this purpose.

It may seem strange that the Prophet should now say that God had a controversy with Judah; for he had previously said that Judah stood faithful with the saints. It seems indeed inconsistent that God should litigate with the Jews, and yet declare them to be upright and separate them from the treacherous and ungodly. What then does this mean? The Prophet, as we have said, spoke comparatively of the tribe of Judah when he said that they remained faithful with the saints: for he did not intend wholly to exculpate the Jews, who were also full of grievous evils; but he intended to praise the worship which still prevailed at Jerusalem, so that the impiety of the ten tribes might appear less excusable, who of their own accord had departed from the rule which God had given.

When anyone today reproves the Papists, they say that another mode of worship is unknown to them, that they have been taught this way by their forefathers, and that the worship which they observe has continued for so long from antiquity that they dare not change it or deviate from it.

Such might have been the excuse made by the Israelites. But the prophet charges them with voluntary defection, for the temple which God had chosen for Himself stood in their sight; there the face of God was, in a manner, to be seen, for all things were arranged according to the heavenly pattern which had been shown to Moses on the mount.

Since then pure religion was before their eyes, was not their sin proved by this very fact, that having neglected the word of God, they gave themselves up to new and fictitious modes of worship? The Prophet then had previously praised the worship, but not the conduct, of the tribe of Judah; and he now comes to their conduct, and says that there were many things in Judah which God would chastise.

The Lord then has a controversy with Judah; and He will begin with that tribe, and will then come down to the house of Jacob. The Prophet, however, speaks here only in passing about the house of Judah, and touches only lightly on the controversy He had with that portion of the people.

How was this? Because he was not a teacher, as has already been said, appointed over the kingdom of Judah, but only over the Israelites. He now refers only to that kingdom to strike terror into his own people: as if he said, “Do you think that the forbearance of God will last forever, because He has until now borne with you?”

No, God will begin to contend with the tribe of Judah. I have said, indeed, that they are innocent compared with you; but still they will not escape punishment, for in a short time God will summon them to judgment.

If He will not spare the Jews, how can your great crimes go unpunished? For certainly you deserve a hundred deaths in comparison with the Jews, among whom at least some integrity and uprightness still exist, for they have made no change in the worship of God. Their life is corrupt, but still the law of God and religion are not despised by them as they are by you. If then God will not spare them, much less will He spare you.”

We now understand for what purpose the Prophet says that God had a controversy with Judah; for it was not his design to terrify the Jews themselves, or to exhort them to repentance, except, it may be, in passing; but his object was to present an example to the Israelites, so that they might fear; for they should have thought within themselves, “If this shall be done in the green tree, what shall become of the dry? (Luke 23:31). If God will exercise with so much severity His vengeance against our brethren the Jews, among whom pure religion still exists, what sort of dreadful end awaits us, who have departed from the law, the worship, the teaching, and the obedience of God, who have become truce-breakers, and degenerate, and in every way profane?”

Hence he immediately adds, And will punish Jacob. “God will indeed begin with the tribe of Judah; this will be the prelude, and He will treat the Jews more mildly than you; but against you He will thunder in full force. It will not then be a remonstrance to lead you to repentance, but a punishment such as you deserve; for He has already contended with you more than enough.”

According to his ways, according to his doings, will He recompense him. He sets down here ways and doings, not as a superfluous repetition, but to show that the repentance of this people had already been looked for more than sufficiently; for they had not ceased for a long time to pursue their own wickedness. The Prophet then, no doubt, condemns here the Jews for their perverse wickedness, because they never left off their sins, though they had for a long time now been admonished and had often been reproved by the Prophets.

In all this discourse the Prophet condemns the ingratitude of the people, and then he shows how shamefully they had departed from the example of their father, in whose name they still took pride. This is the substance. Their ingratitude is shown in this: that they did not acknowledge that they had been anticipated, in the person of their father Jacob, by the gratuitous mercy of God.

The first history is indeed referred to for this purpose: that the posterity of Jacob could understand that they had been elected by God before they were born. For Jacob did not, by choice or design, take hold of his brother's heel in his mother’s womb, but it was an extraordinary thing. Therefore, it was God who guided the hand of the infant and by this sign testified that his adoption was gratuitous.

In short, by saying that Jacob held his brother's foot in his mother’s womb, the intention is the same as if God were reminding the Israelites that they did not excel other people by their own virtue or that of their parents, but that God, of His own good pleasure, had chosen them. The same is alleged against them by Malachi,

Were not Jacob and Esau brethren? Yet Jacob I loved, and Esau I regarded with hatred (Malachi 1:2–3).

For we know with what haughtiness this nation has always exalted itself. “But from where have you arisen? Look back to your origin: you are indeed the children of Abraham and Isaac. In what then do you differ from the Idumeans? They have certainly been begotten by Esau; and Esau was the son of Isaac and the brother of Jacob, and indeed the first-born. You then do not excel as to any dignity that may exist in you. Acknowledge then your origin, and know that whatever excellence may be in you proceeds from the mere favour of God, and this ought to bind you more and more to Him. From where then is this pride?”

Thus our Prophet now speaks, Jacob held the foot of his brother in his mother’s womb; that is, “You have a near relationship with Esau and his posterity, but they are detested by you. From where does this come? Is it for some merit of your own? Boast when you can show that anything has proceeded from you which could gain favour before God.”

No, your father Jacob, a most holy man indeed, while still in his mother’s womb, took hold of the foot of his brother Esau. That is, when he became superior to his brother and gained primogeniture, he was not grown up and could do nothing by his own choice or power, for he was then enclosed in his mother’s womb and had no worthiness, no merit.

Your ingratitude is therefore now all the more base, for God had placed you under obligation to Him before you were born. In the person of the holy patriarch He chose you for His possession. But now, having forsaken Him and relinquished the worship which He has taught in His law, you abandon yourselves to idols and impious superstitions.

“Bring now your pretences by which you cover your impiety! Is not your baseness so gross and palpable that you ought to be ashamed of it?” We now therefore understand the purpose for which the Prophet said that Esau’s foot was laid hold on by Jacob in his mother’s womb.

Moreover, this passage clearly shows that men do not gain the favour of God by their free will, but are chosen by His goodness alone before they are born, and are chosen not on account of works, as the Papists imagine. They concede some election to God but think that it depends on future works. But if it is so, the Prophet's charge was cold and uninspired.

Now since God, through His good pleasure alone, anticipates men and adopts those whom He pleases—not on account of works, but through His own mercy—it therefore follows that those who have been chosen are more bound to Him, and that they are less excusable when they reject the favour offered to them.

But here someone may object and say that it is strange that the posterity of Jacob should be said to have been elected in his person, and yet they had in the meantime departed from God, for the election of God in this case would not be sure and permanent.

And we know that whom God elects He also justifies, and their salvation is so secured that none of them can perish. All the elect are also delivered to Christ as their preserver, so that He may keep them by His divine power, which is invincible, as John teaches in John 10.

What then does this mean? Now we know, and it has been previously stated, that the election of God concerning that people was twofold: for the one was general, and the other special. The election of holy Jacob was special, for he was really one of the children of God. Special also was the election of those who are called by Paul the children of the promise (Romans 9:8).

There was another, a general election, for He received His whole seed into His faith and offered to all His covenant. At the same time, they were not all regenerated; they were not all gifted with the Spirit of adoption. This general election was not then efficacious in all.

The matter in debate is now solved: that no one of the elect shall perish, for the whole people were not elected in a special manner. But God knew whom He had chosen out of that people; and them He endowed, as we have said, with the Spirit of adoption and supplied with His own grace, that they might never fall away.

Others were indeed chosen in a certain way; that is, God offered to them the covenant of salvation. Yet through their ingratitude they caused God to reject them and to disown them as children.

But the Prophet adds that Jacob by his strength had power with God, and had prevailed also with the angel. He here reproaches the Israelites for making a false claim to the name of Jacob, since they had nothing in common with him but had shamefully departed from his example.

He had then power with the angel and with God himself, and he prevailed over the angel. But what sort of persons were they? As the pagan poets called the Romans, when they became degenerated and effeminate, Romulidians, and said that they had descended from those remarkable and illustrious heroes, whose prowess was then well known, and for the same reason called them Scipiadians. So also the Prophet says, “Come now, you children of Jacob, what sort of men are you?

He was endowed with a heroic, yes, with an angelic power, and even more than angelic, for he wrestled with God and gained the victory. But you are the slaves of idols. The devil retains you devoted to himself. You are, as it were, in a brothel—for what else is your temple but a brothel?

And then you are like adulterers and daily commit adultery with your idols. Your abominations, what are they but filthy chains, and which prove that there is no knowledge and no heart in you? For you must have been fascinated when you forsook God and adopted new and profane modes of worship.”

This difference between the holy patriarch Jacob and his posterity must be noted, otherwise we shall not understand the Prophet's objective. And it will be of little use to collect various opinions unless we first know what the Prophet meant, and what was the purport of this rebuke and of this narrative that Jacob had power with God and the angel.

But it must be noted that God and angel are here mentioned in the same sense. We may, indeed, render it ‘angel’ in both places, for אלהים, Aleim, as well as מלאך, melac, signifies an angel. However, every doubt is removed by the Prophet when he at last adds, Jehovah, God of hosts, Jehovah is his name. For here the Prophet expressly mentions the essential name of God, by which he testifies that this same one was the eternal and the only true God, who yet was at the same time an angel.

But it may be asked, How was He the eternal God and at the same time an angel? Indeed, it occurs so frequently in Scripture that it must be well known to us that when the Lord appeared by His angel, the name of Jehovah was given to him—not indeed to all the angels indiscriminately, but to the chief angel by whom God manifested Himself.

This, as I have said, must be well known to us. It therefore follows that this angel was truly and essentially God.

But this would not strictly apply to God unless there is some distinction of persons. Therefore, there must be some person in the Deity to whom this name and title of an angel can apply.

For if we take the name God without difference or distinction and regard it as denoting His essence, it would certainly be inconsistent to say that He is God and an angel too. But when we distinguish persons in the Deity, there is no inconsistency.

How so? Because Christ, the eternal Wisdom of God, put on the character of a Mediator before He put on our flesh. He was therefore a Mediator then, and in that capacity He was also an angel. He was at the same time Jehovah, who is now God manifested in the flesh.

But we must, on the other hand, refute the delirium, or the diabolical madness of that caviller, Servetus, who imagined that Christ was from the beginning an angel, as if He were a phantom and a distinct person, having an essence apart from the Father; for he says that He was formed from three untreated elements. This diabolical notion ought to be wholly discarded by us.

But Christ, though He was God, was also a Mediator. And as a Mediator, He is rightly and fitly called the angel or the messenger of God, for He has of His own accord placed Himself between the Father and men.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that inasmuch as You show Yourself to us at this day so kindly as a Father, having presented to us a singular and an invaluable pledge of Your favour in Your only begotten Son—O grant that we may entirely devote ourselves to You and truly render You that free service and obedience which is due to a Father, so that we may have no other object in life but to confirm that adoption with which You have once favoured us, until we at length, being gathered into Your eternal kingdom, shall partake of its fruit, together with Christ Jesus Your Son. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

Yesterday we explained how it seemed proper to call Him who appeared to holy Jacob in Bethel both God and an angel. For the name Jehovah, by which is expressed the eternal power, essence, and majesty of God, could not be transferred to a mere angel. It is therefore certain that He was the only true God.

But He could not be simply and without any distinction called an angel. However, as Christ even then sustained the character of a Mediator, He was not inconsistently called an angel; and yet we know that He is the eternal God.

So this passage is worthy of being remembered, as it bears testimony to the divinity of Christ. For the Prophet clearly affirms that He is Jehovah, the Creator of heaven and earth, and that He is so by His own power, and that He does not subsist in another, as all creatures do.

Since then He is so, His sovereignty is proved, so that He is not inferior to the Father.

But He says that this is His memorial, or remembrance. This expression has reference to men. The Prophet then means that this wonderful and magnificent name would be well known in the world when Christ should be revealed.

The people, indeed, even then acknowledged that the true God appeared to their father Jacob, but the knowledge of a Mediator was until now obscure.

The Prophet then seems here to refer to the coming of Christ, as though he said that the name Jehovah would be widely known to all when the Mediator would be more clearly exhibited. But I will come now to the other parts of the passage.

The Prophet says that he was a prince, or had power, by his strength with God. I shall shortly explain what this saying means. The name Israel was given to Jacob because of the victory he obtained in that noble wrestling, of which mention is made in Genesis 32. For the holy man did not have a contest with a mortal being but with God Himself; and he overcame in that combat and is therefore called the conqueror of God.

As this way of speaking is harsh, some have attempted by a comment to change it to something more moderate: that is, that Jacob was a prince with God, meaning that God approved of his unusual courage. But God meant to express something more when He gave this name to His servant, for He confessed that He gave way, being, as it were, overcome, and yielded the palm of victory to holy Jacob.

And this ought not to seem strange to us, for we know that whenever God proves our faith and tries us by temptations, these are so many combats by which He contends with us; for He seeks to find out what the strength of our faith is.

Now, when we are said to wrestle with God, and the issue of the contest is such that God leaves the victory to us, we are not then improperly called conquerors, yes, even of God Himself.

But how? Because God works wonderfully in His saints, so that by His own power He casts down Himself; and while He wrestles with us, He supplies us with strength by which we are enabled to bear the weight and pressure of the contest.

Were God to assail us, what would He find but weakness? But when He calls us to the struggle, He at the same time supplies us with the necessary arms.

And it is a wonderful arrangement of the contest when God on one side makes Himself an antagonist and, on the other, fights in us against His own temptations, or against all those wrestlings by which He tries our faith.

Therefore, God is said to be overcome by us when, by the power and aid of His own Spirit, He strengthens and renders us unconquerable; yes, when He makes us triumph over temptations.

And when we consider everything, such is the state of the case that God wills the greater portion of strength to be on our side, and He only takes the weaker portion to tempt and try us.

Indeed, we are not to imagine in this case any such separation, as if God were divided against Himself. But we know that when He tries our faith, He comes forth as if He were a contender or as if He challenged us to the contest. This is indeed certain.

For what are temptations, or what is their object, but to afford us an occasion to exhibit—as on a field of battle—an example and proof of our strength and firmness? But this could not be done without an adversary. For what advantage would it be to fight with a shadow, or when no one engages with us? Therefore, God is like an adversary whenever He tries our faith. And, as has been said before, we have this contest not with men, but with God Himself.

We have indeed to contend with the devil. For Paul says that we have to fight not (only) with flesh and blood, but with mighty powers (Ephesians 6:12). This is doubtless true. But the Lord, at the same time, holds the first place, as that remarkable passage in Job testified, The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away (Job 1:21). So then, we must engage with God Himself.

How so? Because He tries and proves us. But He does not tempt us, as James says (James 1:13–14), for a person is tempted when he is drawn away by his own lust. He does not tempt us to evil; He does not instil into us corrupt desires, which grow up spontaneously and which are innate in our nature. But He tempts, that is, proves us, as He is said to have tempted Abraham (Genesis 22:1).

Since it is so, we must now wrestle with God. But for what purpose? That we may conquer. For God does not intend to overwhelm us while He is making known our faith and constancy of obedience; on the contrary, He builds a theatre on which to show His gifts.

We therefore come to the struggle with the hope of overcoming. That we may overcome, He, as I have said, not only exhorts us to be strong but also supplies us with arms, endows us with strength, and also fights Himself, in a manner, with us, and is powerful in us, and enables us to overcome our temptations.

For this reason, Jacob is said to have power with God, or to have been God’s conqueror.

But what the Prophet adds may seem strange: that this was done by his strength. He had power with God, he says, by his own strength. But if Israel had fought by his own valour, he could not have borne even the shadow of God, for he must have fallen.

He must have been brought to nothing had he not possessed power greater than that of man. What then does this mean: that he was a conqueror by his own strength? We grant that this strength of which the Prophet speaks may be ascribed to holy Jacob when he gained dominion.

There is no better title, as they commonly say, than that of donation, and God is accustomed to transfer to us whatever He bestows, as if it were our own. It is therefore necessary to distinguish wisely here between the strength which man has in himself and that which God confers on him.

The Papists, as soon as any mention is made of the strength or power of man, instantly seize upon it and say, “If there is no free will in man, there is no strength, or there is no power to resist.”

But they betray their own stupidity and thoughtlessness, because they cannot distinguish between the intrinsic strength which is in man himself by nature, and the adventitious strength with which God endows men, and which is the gift of the Holy Spirit.

And the Prophet, when he here commends the strength of holy Jacob, does not extol his free will, as though Jacob derived strength from himself by which he overcame God; but the Prophet means that Jacob was divinely endowed with unconquerable power, so that he came forth a conqueror in the contest.

We now therefore understand the Prophet's meaning.

And since this was especially worthy of being remembered, he repeats that he had power with the angel and prevailed. But we have already said how Jacob prevailed not indeed of himself, but because God had so distributed His power that the greater part was in Jacob himself.

I am therefore accustomed, when I speak of the wrestling and of the daily contests with which God exercises the godly, to adduce this similitude: that God fights with us with His left hand and defends us with His right hand.

That is, He assails us in a weak manner (so to speak) and at the same time stretches forth His right hand to defend us; He displays, in the latter instance, His greater power, so that we may become victorious in the struggle.

And this way of speaking, though at first view it seems harsh, yet wonderfully sets forth the grace and goodness of God, because He deigns to humble Himself for our sake, so as to choose to concede to us the praise of victory—not indeed that we may become proud of ourselves, but that He may be thus more glorified when He prefers exercising His power in defending us rather than in overwhelming us, which He could do with one breath of His mouth.

For He has no need to make any effort to reduce us to nothing: if He only chooses to blow on the whole human race, the whole world would in a moment be extinguished.

But the Lord fights with us and at the same time does not allow us to be crushed; no, He raises us up on high and, as I have already said, concedes the victory to us. Let us now go on.

The Prophet adds that he wept and entreated. He wept, he says, and made supplication unto him. Some explain this clause as referring to the angel, but I do not know whether weeping was suitable for him. The saying may indeed be defended that the angel was, as it were, a suppliant when he yielded up the conquest to the holy man, for it was the same as though one who acknowledges himself unequal in a contest were to throw himself on the ground.

Then they explain weeping thus: “The angel entreated the patriarch when he said, ‘Let me go,’ and this was a confession of victory.” The sense would then be that the patriarch Jacob did not gain any ordinary thing when he came forth a conqueror in the struggle, for God was in a manner the suppliant, because He conceded to him the name and praise of a conqueror.

But I prefer explaining this as referring to the patriarch, and to do so is, in my judgement, more suitable. It is not indeed said that Jacob wept; that is, it is not, I own, stated distinctly and expressly by Moses.

But weeping may be taken for that humility which the faithful always bring to the presence of God; and then weeping was fitting for the patriarch.

For he so gained the victory in the combat that he did not depart without grief and loss, because we know that his leg was put out of joint and that his thigh was dislocated so that he was lame all his life.

Jacob then obtained the victory and there triumphed with God’s approval; but yet he did not depart whole, for God had left him lame. He then felt no small grief, since this weakness in his body continued throughout life. Therefore, weeping was not unbefitting for the holy man, who was humbled in the struggle, though he carried away the palm of victory.

And this ought to be carefully noted, for here the Prophet meets all slanders when he so moderates the sentence that he takes away nothing from God and His glory, though he thus splendidly adorns the patriarch's victory. He was then a prince with God; he prevailed also; he became a conqueror—but how?

He yet wept and entreated Him; this means that there was no cause for pride that he carried away the palm of victory from the contest, but that God led him to humility even by the dislocation of his thigh or leg; and so he entreated Him. The prayer of Jacob is related by Moses, which he made when he asked to be blessed.

But the less, as the Apostle says, is blessed by the greater (Hebrews 7:7). Then Jacob did not exalt himself, as blind men do who claim merit for themselves; but he prayed to God and asked to be blessed by Him who acknowledged Himself to be overcome.

And this ought to be carefully observed, especially the additional circumstance, for we therefore learn that there is no reason why those who are proved by temptations should flee from God, though our flesh indeed seeks ease and desires to be spared.

But when a temptation is at hand, we withdraw ourselves, and there is no one who would not gladly make a truce and also hide himself far from the presence of God.

Since then we desire God to be far from us when He comes forth as an antagonist to try our faith, this prayer of Jacob ought to be remembered. For though he had his leg disjointed, though he was worn out with weariness, he did not yet withdraw himself; he did not wish the angel's departure but retained him, as it were, by force: “You shall bless me; I would rather contend with You and be wholly consumed than let You go before You bless me.”

We therefore see that we ought to seek the presence of God. Though He may severely try us, though we may suffer much, though our strength may fail, though we may be made lame throughout life, we ought not yet to shun God's presence but rather embrace Him with both arms and retain Him, as it were, by force.

For it is much better to groan under our burden and to feel His power who is above us than to continue free from toil and to rot in our pleasures, as those do whom God forsakes.

And we see how much such an indulgence ought to be dreaded by us, for unless we are daily sharpened by various temptations, we immediately gather rust and other evils. It is therefore necessary, so that we may continue in a sound state, that our contests should be daily renewed. And for this reason I have said that we ought to seek the presence of God, however severe the wrestling may be.

It follows, He found him in Bethel. To remove every ambiguity, I would render it: “In Bethel He had found him.” It is indeed a verb in the future tense, but it is certain that the Prophet speaks of the past.

But when we take the past tense, ambiguity in the language still remains, for some understand the passage this way: that God had afterwards found Jacob in Bethel, or that Jacob had found God—that is, when the name of Israel was confirmed to him after the destruction of the town of Sichem, for, to console his grief, God appeared to him there again.

They then explain this as referring to a second vision in that place. But it seems to me that the Prophet had another thing in view: namely, that God had already found Jacob in Bethel; that He had met him when he fled to Syria and went away through fear of his brother.

It was then for the first time that God appeared to His servant and exhorted him to faithfulness; He promised him a safe return to his own country. The Prophet then means that Jacob gained the victory because God had long before begun to embrace him in His love and also testified His love when He had manifested Himself to him in Bethel.

Therefore, He found him in Bethel. This might indeed be referred to Jacob: “He found Him in Bethel”—that is, Jacob found God. But as it is immediately added, There He spake with us, and as this cannot be applied to any other than to God Himself, I am inclined to add also that God had found Jacob in Bethel.

And the Prophet again commends to us the gratuitous goodness of God toward Jacob, because He deigned to meet him on his way and to show that He was Jacob's leader on his journey; for Jacob did not previously think that God was near him, as he says himself:

This is the house of God, and the gate of heaven,
and I knew it not, (Genesis 28:16–17).

When therefore the holy man thought himself to be, as it were, cast away by God and destitute of all aid—when he was alone and without any hope—God is said to have found him. For of His own good will He presented Himself to him when the holy man hoped for no such thing, nor conceived such a thing in his mind.

Therefore, God had already found His servant in Bethel; and there He spoke, or (to continue in the same tense) had spoken to him.

There He had spoken with us. Some take עמנו, omnu, for עמו, omu (He had spoken with him); and they do this, being forced by necessity, for they find no sense in the words that God spoke with us in Bethel. But there is no need to change the words contrary to rules of grammar.

Others who dare not depart from the words of the Prophet imagine a wholly different sense. Some say, “He spoke with us there”—that is, “The Lord speaks by me, Hosea, and by Amos, who is my colleague and friend; for we denounce on you, by His authority, utter ruin and destruction, and God has made known to us at Bethel whatever we bring to you.” But how strained this is, all must see; this is to wrest Scripture, and not to explain it.

Others also speak even more coldly: “There He spoke with us,” as though the angel had said, “Wait, the Lord will speak with us. I have called you Israel, but the Lord will at length come, who will ratify what I now say to you:” as if He were not indeed the eternal God. But this the Prophet immediately expresses when he says, Jehovah is His memorial, Jehovah of hosts. But thus the Jews trifle, who are like irrational beings whenever there is a reference made to Christ.

However, there does not seem to be any great reason why we should toil much about the Prophet’s words; and some even of the Rabbis (not to deprive them of their just praise) have observed this to be the meaning: that the Lord had so spoken with Jacob that what He said belonged to the whole people.

For doubtless whatever God then promised to His servant pertained to the whole body of the people and all his posterity. Why then do interpreters so greatly torment themselves when it is evident that God spoke through the person of one man with all Abraham's posterity?

And this agrees best with the context, for the Prophet now applies, so to speak, to the whole people what he had until now recorded of the patriarch Jacob.

So that they might not then think that the history of one man was related, he says that it belongs to all. How so? Because the Lord had so spoken with holy Jacob that His voice ought to resound in the ears of all.

For what was said to the holy man? Did God only reveal Himself to him? Did He promise to be a Father only to him? No, He adopted his whole seed and extended His favour to all his posterity.

Since then He had so spoken to all the Israelites, they ought now to be more ashamed of their defection, because they had so greatly degenerated from their father, with whom they were still connected.

For there was a sacred bond of unity between Jacob and his children, since God embraced them all in His love and favoured them all with His adoption. We now perceive the Prophet's mind. Let us proceed—

The Prophet is now urgently pressing the people. Having referred to the example of the patriarch, he shows how unlike him his descendants were, with whom God could accomplish nothing through sound teaching, though He was constantly solicitous for their salvation and stirred up His prophets to bring back the lost and scattered to the way of safety.

Since this was the case, the Prophet accuses them of ingratitude. He speaks first of repentance, and then he shows that he and other ministers of God had labored in vain, because such was the perversity of the people that teaching had no effect. His sermon is short, yet it contains much.

Turn, he says, to your God. He alludes here to the apostasy of the people by instructing them to turn to their God, and, at the same time, condemns whatever the Israelites were accustomed to set up as a defense when the Prophets reproved them. For they wished their own fictitious modes of worship to serve as a justification; they wished the gods they devised themselves to occupy the place of the true God.

The Prophet eliminates such excuses by commanding the people to turn to their God. “Why,” he says, “you do indeed worship gods and greatly weary yourselves in your superstitions; but confess that you are apostates, who have rejected the law delivered to you by the true God. Return, then, to your God.” And he calls God the God of Israel, not to honor them, but to reproach them, because they had willingly and deliberately cast off the worship of the true God, who had made Himself known to them.

The true way of repentance is then shown. The beginning of the verse, as I have already said, requires the people to repent. But since we know that people trifle with God when they are called to repentance, it is not in vain that a definitive, or at least a short, description of repentance is added, by which it is made clear what it means to repent, or to turn to God.

Then the Prophet says, Keep mercy, or kindness and judgement. He begins with the second table and then adds piety toward God. But he lays down only two things, in which he included the whole teaching of the second table. For what is God’s design, from the fifth to the last commandment, but to teach us to shape our lives according to the rule of love?

We are then taught in the second table of the law how we ought to act toward our brethren; or if one wishes for a shorter summary, the second table of the law shows the mutual duties of people.

But the Prophet begins here with the second part of the law, for the Prophets are not accustomed to strictly observe order, nor do they always observe a regular method. It is enough for them to mention the main things by which they explain their subject; and therefore, it is no wonder that the Prophet here, according to his usual manner, mentions love first, and then proceeds to the worship of God.

This order, as I have said, is indeed neither natural nor legitimate; but this is of no importance. Indeed, it was not without the best reason that the Prophets usually did this, for repentance is better tested by the observance of the second table than by that of divine worship.

For as hypocrites dissemble and hide themselves with elaborate coverings, the Lord applies a touchstone. He does this whenever He draws them to the light and exposes to public view their frauds, robberies, cruelty, perjuries, thefts, and similar vices.

Since hypocrites can thus be better convicted by the second table of the law, the Lord rightly appeals to this when He speaks of repentance, as though He said, “Let it now be made evident what your repentance is, whether it be feigned or sincere; for if you act justly and uprightly toward your neighbors, if you observe equity and rectitude, it is a sure evidence of your repentance.”

At the same time, the Prophet does not overlook the worship of God, for he adds, Hope always in your God. By the word hope, he first requires faith, then prayer (which arises from it), and thanksgiving (which necessarily follows). Thus the whole worship of God is briefly included, as a part representing the whole, in the word hope.

The Prophet’s meaning then is that Israel, forsaking their own superstitions, should rely on the one true God and place all their salvation on Him, that they should fly to Him, and ascribe to Him alone the praise due for all blessings. By so doing, they would restore the pure worship of God and cast away all their adulterous superstitions. He had already spoken of the second table of the law.

We therefore see that repentance is nothing else but a reformation of the whole life according to the law of God. For God has explained His will in His law; and to the degree we depart or deviate from it, we depart from the Lord.

But when we turn to God, the true proof is when we amend our lives according to His law, and begin by worshipping Him spiritually (the main part of which worship is faith, from which prayer proceeds), and when, in addition to this, we act kindly and justly toward our neighbors, and abstain from all injuries, frauds, robberies, and all kinds of wickedness. This is the true evidence of repentance.

But while the Prophet exhorted the Israelites to repentance, he adds that such was their perverseness that his efforts were fruitless. Canaan! he says. I read this by itself, for what some consider to be understood is weak, such as, “He was assimilated to, or was like Canaan, in whose hand,” etc.

But, on the contrary, the Prophet here condemns the Israelites with one word, as though he said that they were entirely aliens and unworthy to be called the children of Abraham. And thus what we say is often abrupt when we speak indignantly.

The Prophet then calls them “Canaan” out of indignation, which means this: “You are not the children of Abraham; you falsely boast of his name, which cannot be suitable for you, for you are Canaan.”

He afterward adds, In his hand is the balance of fraud, he loves to plunder, or to spoil. Literally it is, “he loves to spoil.” But the sense is clear that they loved to plunder; that is, they were carried away with all greediness to acts of robbery.

It must first be noticed that the Prophet here exposes to infamy the carnal descendants of Abraham by calling them Canaan, and this accusation is often to be found in the Prophets.

And the reason they were addressed this way was that these senseless men were accustomed to proudly use the distinction of their race as their shield. “What! We are a holy people.”

Since by this pretense they rejected all the warnings of the Prophets, God casts back this reproach: “You are not the children of Abraham; but you are Canaan,” as though He said, “Nothing in that nation has yet changed; the Israelites are always like themselves.”

The Lord had once cleansed the land of godless men. But when the descendants of Abraham became like the Canaanites, they were called the seed of Canaan, as though the same nation that was there formerly still remained, for there was no difference in their conduct; they were equal or the same in depravity.

But the reason he calls them the race of Canaan is that they carried in their hand a deceitful balance and devoted themselves with all avidity to plunder. The deceitful balance may be extended to their dissimulations, fallacies, and falsehoods, by which God, as He had before complained, was surrounded. But as it immediately follows, He loves robberies, I prefer to understand here those two modes of doing injury that include almost every kind of wickedness: for people either craftily defraud when they injure others, or they do harm to their neighbors by open force.

Since those who wrong their neighbors, then, either openly injure them or circumvent the simple by their frauds and crafty dealings, Hosea lays down here, first, the deceitful balance, and then he adds their greediness in spoiling or plundering.

It is then as if he had said that they were fraudulent and also robbers who proceeded with open violence. He means that they were, without law or any restraint, addicted to acts of wrong and injustice, and were so intent on doing mischief as to do it either by craft or by open force.

There is then no wonder that they were called an uncircumcised race. Why? Because they had nothing to do with God, since they had thus departed from His law; indeed, they abhorred kindness and mercy.

It also follows that they were void of all piety, since they were thus unmindful of all equity toward their neighbors. This is the meaning.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as You appear not now to us in shadows and types, as formerly to the holy fathers, but clearly and plainly in Your only-begotten Son, O grant that we may be wholly given to the contemplation of Your image, which thus shines before us; and that we may in such a manner be transformed into it as to make increasing advances, until at length, having put off all the filth of our flesh, we may be fully conformed to that pure and perfect holiness which dwells in Christ, as in Him dwells the fullness of all blessings, and thus obtain at last a participation of that glory which our Lord has procured for us by His resurrection. Amen.

Here God complains by His prophet that the Israelites flattered themselves in their vices because their affairs were prospering and going according to their wishes. It is a vice too common that people congratulate themselves as long as fortune, as is commonly said, smiles on them, thinking that God is then favorable to them.

Since the condition of the people was such, they despised all the prophets and their reproofs. Of this audacity the Lord now complains: Ephraim has said, I am yet become rich. There is an emphasis to be noticed in the adversative particle אך (ach). It is sometimes a simple affirmative in Hebrew, but here the prophet meant to express something else: namely, that the Israelites laughed at all reproofs because God seemed to be favorable to them, as though He manifested His favor by prosperity.

“I am, however, become rich; and therefore I care nothing for what the prophets may say, for I am contented with my lot.” This, as I have said, is a common evil. Therefore, this passage ought to be carefully noted, lest, when the Lord spares us for a time, we think that we are innocent before Him. For there is nothing more to be feared than our eyes being dazzled by a prosperous and desirable state of things.

Though the Lord then may bear with us and not immediately unleash His vengeance against us, but, on the contrary, cherish us, as it were, kindly in His bosom, yet if He rebukes us by His word, we ought to pay attention to His threatenings.

But they further add, All my labours shall not find iniquity, or, they shall not find iniquity in all my labours. Many read it simply as the words are, “My labours shall not find iniquity;” but as the expression seems awkward, I have tried to make it smoother, as others also have done, “They shall not find iniquity in all my labours.” This boasting went further, for the prophet shows that the people were not only secure because the Lord gave them some tokens of His paternal favor, but that they were also intoxicated with this impious confidence that God would not have favored them if they had not been exempt from every fault and vice. And this second clause ought to be carefully noted.

Now it is a depravity that is by no means to be endured when people begin to despise God because He deals kindly with them, and when they abuse His leniency so as to condemn all His teaching and all His threatening; this is indeed a very great perversion.

But when to all this is added such pride that ungodly and reprobate men persuade themselves that they are righteous because God does not immediately punish them—this is, so to speak, a diabolical madness. And yet we see that this is a common thing.

For godless people are not only proud of their wealth, they are not only inflated with their own power, but they also think that God is in some way indebted to them. “Why! It must be that God regards me as innocent and pure from every vice, for He favors me. He then does not find in me what is worthy of punishment.” Thus the wicked raise their horns against God while He indulges them and does not appear as severe towards them as they have deserved.

When today we perceive these evils prevailing among the greater portion of mankind, there is no reason to be astonished. But we ought at the same time to profit from the instruction of the prophet, so that we may not be blinded by prosperity, despise reproofs, and flatter ourselves in our sins; and also, that we may not accumulate for ourselves a store of God’s wrath when He deals kindly with us.

Let us not then abuse His forbearance. Let us not think that we are innocent before Him because He does not immediately execute His judgments. Instead, let us learn to examine ourselves carefully and to shake off our vices, so that we may humble ourselves under His hand, though He restrains Himself from inflicting punishment. This is the application of this doctrine.

But we must notice what the prophet adds: They shall not find iniquity in my labours. That is, iniquity shall not be found in my labours because this is wickedness or a crime requiring expiation. I wonder that interpreters explain this passage so coldly, for they say, “There shall not be found in my labours iniquity or sin.”

But the prophet does not use a conjunction, but uses the particle אשר (asher), which is to be interpreted here exegetically. The meaning is that hypocrites, while they claim for themselves the praise of innocence, for the sake of dissembling, ostensibly detest every wickedness and crime.

“Iniquity shall not be found in my labours, for this is wickedness; far be it that I should be discovered to be a wicked person in my doings, for I am without fraud in all my dealings.”

But is this the case? By no means. Because they judge God’s favor by prosperous fortune, they think that God would not be so kind to them unless He regarded them as just and pure. Hence we see how securely hypocrites mock God when they begin to despise His teaching and warnings. We need not then wonder that today so much perverseness prevails everywhere in the world. But let us also apply this mode of teaching which the prophet sets before us.