cially desolate, and not as
the former abode of the Israelites, appears from the following--"in dry
land," without the Article, and not, as otherwise we would expect,
"in _the_ dry land." _Finally_,--We have a parallel to this in the
threatening in Deut. xxviii. 48: "And thou servest thine enemy whom the
Lord thy God will send upon thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in
nakedness, and in great want."

Ver. 6. "_And I will not have mercy upon her children, for they are
children of whoredoms._"

It appears from ver. 7, that the children are to be repudiated on
account of their origin (compare the remarks on i. 2), and not on
account of their morals. _Michaelis_ says, "They have the same
disposition, and follow the same course as their adulterous mother; for
a viper bringeth forth a viper, and a bad raven lays a bad egg." The
cause of their rejection is, that they are children of whoredoms. That
they are such, is proved by the circumstance that their mother is
whoring. Compare also v. 7: "They have become faithless to the Lord,
for they have born strange children." In point of fact, however, a
sinful origin and a sinful nature are identical.

Ver. 7. "_For their mother has been whoring, she who bore them has been
put to shame; for she has said, I will go after my lovers, the givers
of my bread and my water, of my wool and my flax, of my oil and my
drink._"

[Hebrew: hvbiwh] is explained in a two-fold way. The common explanation
is: "She has practised what is disgraceful, she has acted [Pg 237]
shamefully." Others, on the contrary, explain: "She has been put to
shame, she has been disgraced." In this latter way it is explained by
_Manger_, who remarks, "that this word is stronger than [Hebrew: znh];
that it implies not only an accusation of vile whoredom, but also that
she has been convicted of this crime, and as it were apprehended _in
flagranti_; so that, even if she were yet impudent enough, she could no
longer deny it, but must sink down in confusion and perplexity." This
latter exposition is, without doubt, the preferable one; for, 1.
[Hebrew: hvbiw] never occurs in the first-mentioned signification.
_Winer_ contents himself with quoting the passage before us. _Gesenius_
refers, moreover, to Prov. x. 5. But the [Hebrew: bN mbiw] of that
passage is evidently a son bringing disgrace upon his parents,--in
xxix. 15 [Hebrew: amv] is added,--or making them ashamed, disappointing
their hopes. On the other hand, the signi