The Pulpit Commentary — Hosea — Section 19

DRmascue, the capi~l of Syria, though that city had been lost even in the days of Solomon, together with Hamath on the Orontef, the key of Eastern Syria, thus checking ifrwt crushing that hostile power. The northern kingdom had reached an unprecedented height of wealth and power; the sovereign hi\d been triumphant in war, and his subjects were n_o~,- happy and prosperous in peace. But at this very period of material wealth nnd nnlttary glory, after he had" restored the coasts of Israel from the entering of Ilnmnth [t.he lower part of the Crnlo-SyriRn valley, from the gorge of the Litany to Bna.lbok) to tl,c _sea of the plain," amid the splendour of his Rchievements and the opulence of his subJect.s, the prophet foretold, not merely the decline, but the actual downfall of the kingdom or Israel. An important lesson connects itself with this. It is n~t only the _truth of the predict.ion, so contrary to u.11 calculation, so opposed to all seeming pro- bab1hty, bt'.t. the warning thus f\1rnished ag~inst mistaking temporu.l prosperity for a proof of D1vme favour, or reckonmg and restmg on the permanence of earthly posses- s10ns. In the case before us, however, a worm was at the root of the gourd. The moral progress of the nation was in the inverse ratio of its material prosperity. VI. THE PAI1'FUL DECLARATION OF THE NATIONAL SIN, 'l'hat sin W&S more than ordi_nary apostasy, ba~ as such a state of thing~ assuredly is; it was idolatry which i~ spmtual adultery. This was ex.pressed by the symbol of the prophet, whether in reality, vision, or parable, wedding an unchaste woman, a. wife of whoredoms, by name Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim. If such a union, even in symbol, was humiliating to the pure spmt of tbe prophet, how dreadful for a people to be in a condition so disgustingly loathsome and fearfully sinful, exposed to the deserved wru.th of the Almighty, and obnoxious to the doom he has pronounced against such," Thou hast destroyed all them that go a-whoring from thee!" If such relationship is repulsive in the extreme to every man of proper sentiments and virtuous feeling, how unspeakably hateful to the infinitely holy God to stand in the position of husband to a people so abominably faithless and impure! Yet their Maker had been their Husband, even the Lord of hosts, which is his adorable name. , ers. 4-9.-The sufferings of Israel symholically recorded. The three children of the prophet by Gomer symbolize at once a degree of sin and a period of suffering. The forefathers of Israel had been idolaters in their native land and in Egypt, as we le,1rn from the admonition of Joshua (x.x.iv. 14), "Put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt." l:lut God took them into covenant with himself &t Sinai; this new relation may be represented by the prophet's espousing at the Divine commant.l Gomer, notwithstanding her previous impurity and lewdness. But though God took the people of Israel into such a close and endearing relation to himself, yet their posterity, instead of proving themselves children of God, often forsook God and fell into idolatry, this apostasy of the descendants through succeeding generations is set forth by the children of whoredoms which the prophet had by a wife of whoredoms. So with ourselves tainted with original sin; we are stained by many actual transgressions. "Sin," it has been well said, "is contagious, and, unless the entail is cut off by grace, hereditary." L '!.'HE NA.ME oF THE FIRST CHILD IMPLIES DEGENERACY. Jezreel, if taken in its local sense, reminds of bloodshed as also idolatry, and of the nemesis that in due time fol- lowed; but if understood appellatively, the name of dominion implied in Israel degene- rates into that of dispersion included in JezreeL 1. Imperfect work is imperfectly reward,ed. No work done for God can make him our debtor, yet he is graciously pleased to reward honest work in his service, the reward being entirely of g;race and n?t of debt. J ehu executed God's judgment on the house of Ahab, and had his reward in the succession of his family to the fourth generation. 'fhough he pretended zeal be dit.l not do the Lord's work sinctrely; his own selfish interests and his own base designs rui1.1gled largely with his motives, and marred the worth of his work .. The obtainm?nt of a kingdom for himself rather than obedience to God was the chief end on ~h1cll his heart was set. Neither did he perform the Lord's work thoroughly. He abohsheu the idolatry of Baal, but he adhered to the idolatry of the calves; obviously because the former served bis own ends and helped to establish him in the kingdom, while the latter ter.ded., as he thought, to secure his interest in the kingdom an? keep ~is subjects detacl,ed from Judah. 2. Punishmffi,t, tlwuglt slow, iB su1·e. Yet a httlc wlule anrl thu CH, J. 1-11.] THE BOOK OF HOSEA. 13