sound view, appears clearly from ver. 2. According to the right exposition (compare p. 195 sqq.), this verse can be referred only to the first beginning of the relation betwixt the Lord and the people of Israel--to that only by which He acquired the right of property in this people, on delivering them from Egypt. This is confirmed, moreover, by the second half of the verse under consideration: "As the Lord loveth," etc. Here the love of the Lord to Israel in its widest extent is spoken of. Every limitation of it to a single manifestation--be it a [Pg 275]renewal of love after the apostasy, or the corrective discipline inflicted from love--is quite arbitrary; and the more so, because, by the addition, "And they turned," etc., the love of God is represented as running parallel with the apostasy of the people. The same result is obtained from a consideration of the first half. For what entitles us to explain "love" by "love again," or even by "_restitue amoris signa_" as is done by those who hold the opinion, already refuted, that the woman is _Gomer_? The word "love" corresponds exactly with "as the Lord loveth." If the latter must be understood of the love of the Lord in its whole extent,--if it does not designate merely the manifestation of love, but love itself,--how can a more limited view be taken of the former "love?" How could we explain, as is done by those who defend the reference to a new marriage, the words, "Beloved of her friend, and an adulteress," as referring to a former marriage of the wife, and as tantamount to--who was beloved by her former husband, and yet committed adultery? In that case, there would be the greatest dissimilarity betwixt the type and the antitype. Who, in that case, is to be the type of the Lord? Is it to be the former husband, or the prophet? If the figure is at all to correspond with the reality,--the first member with the second, the רֵעַ can be none other than the prophet himself.--Let us now proceed to particulars, אהב, "love," is stronger than קח, "take," in chap. i. 2. There, marriage only was spoken of; here, marriage from love and in love. This is still more emphatically pointed out by the subsequent words אהבת רע, and contrasted with the conduct of the wife, which is indicated by מנאפת, so that the sense is this: "In love take a wife who, although she is beloved by thee, her friend, commits adultery, and with whom--I tell it to thee beforehand--thou wilt live in a constant antagonism of love, and of ingratitude, the grossest violation of love." The word "_love_" has a reference to the love preceding and effecting the marriage; the word "_beloved_," to the love uninterruptedly continuing during the marriage, and notwithstanding the continued adultery, unless we should say--and it is quite admissible--that "love" implies, at the same time, "to take out of love," and "to love constantly." Instead of "beloved by _thee_" it is said, "beloved by her _friend_." Many have been thereby misled; but