My Notes on Hosea 5:15-6:7

In a previous post I noted that God, not Assyria, was the real source of the punishment the kingdoms of Israel and Judah had experienced, and would continue to experience. The purpose of this punishment is made clear in the verse which opens the text we are looking at today.

Hosea 5:15.  In verse 14 God had compared himself to a lion in relation to both kingdoms (Israel and Judah). Here, in verse 15, he indicates that he is returning to his place, perhaps to be understood figuratively as his lair, or lion’s den. I noted that describing God as an attacking lion was striking since the might of the Assyrian empire was often symbolized by a lion. In reality, it is God who is behind the troubles Israel and Judah are facing, Assyria is merely his instrument of punishment. Even more striking is the fact that elsewhere in the Bible, God is often referred to as the Shepherd of his People (e.g. Psalms 23:1-3; Ps 95:7; Ps 100:3; Micah 7:14), and, it was, of course, a shepherd’s duty to protect the flock from lions and other wild beasts (1 Sam 17:34; Acts 20:28-30). God, however, makes it clear that he will not protect his flock but will attack it through Assyria.

Thus God is not willing to intervene and save his people. Instead, like a sated lion he will return to his place (the temple, figuratively portrayed as his den or lair?). At this point the lion imagery begins to break down as the purpose of his lion-like action (attacking the flock) becomes clear. God wants his people to admit to their guilt (asham). Asham is a Hebrew verb meaning to be guilty. The noun form of the word is often used in cultic contexts and refers to the guilt offering (see Lev 5:6-7). To seek God is a technical term for approaching him in the temple for purpose of worship. God has brought distress upon the people for the purpose of bringing them to repentance and right worship

Hosea 6:1-3~
Douay-Rheims: Hos 6:1  In their affliction they will rise early to me: Come, and let us return to the Lord.
Hos 6:2  For he hath taken us, and he will heal us: he will strike, and he will cure us.
Hos 6:3  He will revive us after two days: on the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight. We shall know, and we shall follow on, that we may know the Lord. His going forth is prepared (established, certain, sure) as the morning light, and he will come to us as the early and the latter rain to the earth.

The people understand this fact (i.e., why God has brought distress upon them), but, amazingly do not really act upon it! God, through his prophet tells us the prayer they will offer, and it is a beautiful prayer indeed; but it is worthless.

The people talk about returning to the Lord, realizing that he has taken and struck them (like a lion), but that he will also heal and cure them. In other words, they show they know the purpose of the punishment, and they (seemingly) show trust in God’s mercy, acknowledging that a return to the Lord will lead to a quick response on his part (two days; three). His responding to them, they say, is as certain as the morning light, and as refreshing and life giving as the early and late rain. There is irony in all of this. The word which describes God as going forth like the morning light is ( מוצאו), and it often refers to the rising of the sun (see comments below).

Hosea 6:4-7~
Douy-Rheims: Hos 6:4  What shall I do to thee, O Ephraim? what shall I do to thee, O Juda? your mercy is as a morning cloud, and as the dew that goeth away in the morning.
Hos 6:5  For this reason have I hewed them by the prophets, I have slain them by the words of my mouth: and thy judgments shall go forth as the light.
Hos 6:6  For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice: and the knowledge of God more than holocausts.
Hos 6:7  But they, like Adam, have transgressed the covenant, there have they dealt treacherously against me.
But God sees through all their fine words and sentiments. They are not truly repentant, and they are not trusting in God’s mercy. Rather, they are trusting in their own presumptions about God. They described God’s merciful response as a going forth like the sun ( מוצאו) and being as certain as the morning light, but God describes their mercy as like a mere morning cloud which the rising of the sun burns off, for their mercy has no substance to it. They described God’s response in terms of a refreshing and life-giving spring rain, but they are nothing more than a light dew, soon evaporated by the rising sun.

God did come forth as lightin response to such “repentance”, but it was the light of judgment: For this reason have I hewed them by the prophets, I have slain them by the words of my mouth: and thy judgments shall go forth as the light.

This lack of mercy (hesed: covenant love, fidelity, loving kindness, etc) is why God has sent the people prophets with words and threats and promises of judgment.

Since they despised God’s gentler warnings and measures, He used severer.. He hewed them, He says, as men hew stones out of the quarry, and with hard blows and sharp instruments overcome the hardness of the stone which they have to work. Their piety and goodness were light and unsubstantial as a summer cloud; their stony hearts were harder than material stone. The stone takes the shape which man would give it; God hews these people* in vain; they* will not receive the image of God, for which and in which they were* framed.

“God, elsewhere also, likens the force and vehemence of his word to ‘a hammer which breaks the rock in pieces;’ ‘a sword which pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit.’ He continually hammered, beat upon, disquieted them, and so vexed them (as they thought) even unto death, not allowing them to rest in their sins, not suffering them to enjoy themselves in them, but forcing them (as it were) to part with things which they loved as their lives and would as soon part with their souls as with them.” (E.B. Pusey, THE MINOR PROPHETS. public domain book. Italic texts marked with * represent amendments by me)

For I desired mercy and not sacrifice- This statement, much abused by certain scholars in the 19th century, is not a repudiation of sacrifice itself, but, rather, a repudiation of the belief that sacrifice can be done without being based upon covenant hesed (love, fidelity). Mercy takes precedent over ritual, sacrifice, devotion; these things should be based upon mercy, not trumping it: Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you tithe mint and anise and cummin and have left the weightier things of the law: judgment and mercy and faith. These things you ought to have done and not to leave those undone (Matt 23:23).

From the Catechism #2100~Outward sacrifice, to be genuine, must be the expression of spiritual sacrifice: “The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit….”(Ps 51:17) The prophets of the Old Covenant often denounced sacrifices that were not from the heart or not coupled with love of neighbor (Amos 5:21-25; Isa 1:10-20). Jesus recalls the words of the prophet Hosea: “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice” (Matt 9:13, Matt 12:7, Hos 6:6). The only perfect sacrifice is the one that Christ offered on the cross as a total offering to the Father’s love and for our salvation (Heb 9:13-14). By uniting ourselves with his sacrifice we can make our lives a sacrifice to God.

The word translated as I desired is  חפצתי, which means literally, I am inclined towards, or I bend down to. God responds as he sees fit, not as he is dictated to.

But at Adam they transgressed the covenant, there they dealt faithlessly with me- the Masoretic text reads “like Adam”. Some see this as a reference to Adam’s sin of eating the fruit in the garden, however, the words “there they dealt faithlessly with me”, suggests that “Adam” is to be understood as a place name, rather than as a person. Adam is a place name ( a city) associated with the crossing of the Jordan (Joshua 3:16). This crossing of the Jordan represented God’s fulfillment of his covenant promises. It also brought into force the covenant obligations the chosen people agreed to take upon themselves. Perhaps Hosea is not referring to one specific sin. Rather, he is implying that the people, from the very start of their existence in the promised land, were not faithful to these obligations.

My Notes on Hosea 14:2-10

The verse numbering here follows that of the DRV and the RNAB. The RSV translation of Hosea is in some instances one verse behind in its numbering (supplied in red). References with no accompanying alternate in red indicates that the numbering of the two translations are identical. ALSO, letters following verse numbers indicate parts of a verse, e.g., 5:15ab designates the first and second clauses of verse 15 in chapter 5; 5:15c indicates the third clause, etc.

Hos 14:2 (1)  Return, O Israel, to the Lord thy God: for thou hast fallen down by thy iniquity.
Hos 14:3 (2)  Take with you words, and return to the Lord, and say to him: Take away all iniquity, and receive the good: and we will render the calves of our lips.

Verses 2-4 (1-3) are an appeal to the people by Hosea, speaking on behalf of God and calling for their repentance, a return of  Israel to the Lord. The prophet not only bids them to return,  but he also tells them what to say.  What follows in the remaining verses (5-10) [4-9] are the response God will presumably make to the people if they follow the course of action called for by the prophets. The whole passage should be seen in relation to Hosea 5:15-6:4.

In Hosea 5:15-6:4 (part of which is tomorrow’s first reading)  God states that he will withdraw from his people until they admit their guilt and return (5:15ab). But God is under no delusions regarding his people, he knows how they will act. They will speak (God says) a fine sounding prayer and insist that they are returning to their Lord (5:15c-6:3), but it is insincere (6:4). The people’s return in that passage is described without their referencing their iniquity/guilt, the very reason why God has withdrawn from them! (5:15ab). So, here, the prophet advises them to Take with you words, and return to the Lord, and say to him: Take away all iniquity.

Verse 4 (3) continued~And receive the good: and we will render the calves of our lips. After they ask God to take away all iniquity they are then to appeal to him to receive the good. I see the clauses in parallel: the good they ask God to receive is their acknowledgement of their iniquity (understanding take and receive as virtually synonymous). This will be followed by the people offering the calves of their lips (calves are for sacrifice, therefore, “the sacrifice of our lips,” i.e., praise, worship). In this way they will show that they have put away from them what they were declared guilty of, namely insincere conversion, a mere matter of words (6:1-4), and a reliance on false gods (see next verse). See also 7:13-14~they have spoken lies against me. And they have not cried to me with their heart…

Hos 14:4 (3) Assyria shall not save us, we will not ride upon horses, neither will we say any more: The works of our hands are our gods: for thou wilt have mercy on the fatherless that is in thee.

The words of the people continue. Instead of trusting in their God who showed himself a father to them (11:1), they became fatherless, choosing to cater to Assyria to ensure their well-being (5:13, 8:9), and relying on the gods of Canaan (14:9, [14:8]), the works of their hands which became their gods (see also 8:6, 13:2) They will no longer seek Assyria’s aid or speak of these gods as belonging to them, because they have placed their lips at the sacrificial service of the True God (see previous verse).

Hos 14:5 (4)  I will heal their breaches, I will love them freely: for my wrath is turned away from them.

Here begins God’s beautiful response concerning what he will do if the people will do his bidding given through the prophet. God will heal their breaches (covenant breaking, sins against him). The words should be seen in relation to the statement that Assyria will not save us (verse 4 [3]). What Assyria couldn’t do, God will: Ephraim (i.e., Israel) went to the Assyrian, and sent to the avenging king: and he shall not be able to heal you (5:13).   God’s healing will be brought about only if the people truly repent, putting way their feigned piety which said:  Come, and let us return to the Lord. For he hath taken us, and he will heal us: he will strike, and he will cure us  (6:1-2 in DRV, 6:1 in RNAB, RSV). See 7:1 also.

My wrath is turned away from them. Their is a word play in the Hebrew text. The fact that God’s wrath is turned away (שׁב shûb) is the result of God his healing their breaches ( משׁובתם meshûbâh).

Hos 14:6 (5)  I will be as the dew, Israel shall spring as the lily, and his root shall shoot forth as that of Libanus.

I will be as dew. In 5:14 and 13:7-8 God had portrayed himself as a hunting lion (or bear) coming against his people, rending and tearing. In the insincere conversion prayer attributed to the people they are portrayed as praying:  “Come, let us return to the LORD; for he has torn, that he may heal us; he has stricken, and he will bind us up….he will come to us as the showers, as the spring rains that water the earth” (6:1, 3). The image of God as a lion or bear rending or tearing has become foreign; and the image of his coming as a gentle spring rained has been made even gentler: he will come and be as dew. If the people heed the prophet’s cal,l God will no more present himself as a destroying animal of punishment, but as a power of life and growth: Israel shall spring as the lily; and as something that gives strength and establishment: Israel’s root shall shoot forth as that of Libanus (a reference to the famed trees of Lebanon see Ps 92:13 [12]; Ps 104:16).

Hos 14:7 (6)  His branches shall spread, and his glory shall be as the olive tree: and his smell as that of Libanus.

The tree image continues in this and the next two verses. The spreading of branches indicates abundant life and vitality brought about by the dew that is God (see previous verse)

His glory shall be as the olive tree. God’s people (personified since verse 5b [6b] by “his“) are compared to an olive tree planted by God in Jeremiah 11:16-17, but there God is threatening to burn it because of the people’s idolatry. In Ps 52, the man with a deceitful tongue will be uprooted, while the righteous man is like an olive tree planted in the house of God.

And his smell as that of Libanus (Lebanon). The smell of Lebanon was proverbial due to the abundance of cedar, mulberry, fig and olive trees and, also, fragrant growth such as myrrh, thyme, lavender, sage, etc.  (see Song of Songs 4:11). Again, the image should be associated with the words of God I will be as the dew in the previous verse

Hos 14:8 (7)  They shall be converted that sit under his shadow: they shall live upon wheat, and they shall blossom as a vine: his memorial shall be as the wine of Libanus.

Israel, still personified (“his“) will-because of what God has done for them-become an instrument of conversion and of life for others (“they“).

They shall live upon wheat…blossom as the vine. The conversion of the personified people will bring back life and abundance to the land, taken away because of their idolatry (2:10-14 [9-13]). Seeing this, others (“they“) will be moved to conversion and share in the abundance.

His memorial shall be as the wine of Libanus. Note the return to the personified people (“his“). The people’s conversion and its effect on others shall forever be a memorial, a well remembered as the fine wine of Lebanon.

Hos 14:9 (8) Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? I will hear him, and I will make him flourish like a green fir tree: from me is thy fruit found.

Ephraim (i.e., Israel) will recognize that it was not their idols (fertility gods) who benefited them, giving their land abundance of grain, wine and oil (2:10 [9]).  When Israel does so it will flourish like a green fir tree, bearing fruit from God. Thus Israel itself will be sown in the land (i.e., returned from exile, 2:25 [23]). Again, the image of God as dew should be seen at work here

Hos 14:10 (9)  Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent, and he shall know these things? for the ways of the Lord are right, and the just shall walk in them: but the transgressors shall fall in them.

Who is wise…? The necessity of wisdom for understanding the prophets message. Wisdom is bound up with acknowledging that the ways of the Lord are right, and walking in them. Here we see that prophecy is “an object of study and a guide to life” (Hosea: Anchor Bible Commentary, Andersen and Freedman).

SUGGESTED READINGS: These are not endorsements of the views and interpretations found in these works.

Minor Prophets: Navarre Bible Commentary. Theological faculty of the University of Navarre. A good, basic commentary, theological and devotional.

Amos, Hosea, Micah: Old Testament Mesage, vol. 7. By Father Bruce Vawter.

Conscience of Israel: Pre-exilic Prophets and Prophecy. Father Bruce Vawter. A bit dated but still a good introduction to the subject.

God’s Heralds: A guide to the Prophets of Israel. J. Chaine. Considered a good introduction when first published it is now rather outdated.

Grace Abounding: A Commentary on the Book of Hosea: International Theological Commentary. H.D. Beeby. Protestant. Series authorship is ecumenical in scope.

The Twelve Prophets, Vol. 1: Berit Olam: Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry. Marvin A Sweeney. The Berit Olam series authorship is ecumenical in scope and Sweeney is (I think) Jewish. The first volume is on Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, and Jonah.

Hosea: A Commentary on the Book of Hosea: (Hermenia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible). Hans Wolff. The Hermenia series authorship is ecumenical in scope, the author is Lutheran.

Hosea: Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries. Francis L. Andersen and David Noel Freedman. The series authorship is ecumenical in scope. The authors of this volume are both Protestant.

This Weeks Posts: Sunday, March 27-Saturday, April 2

TWO NOTES THIS WEEK: (1) This will be a slow blogging week, at least as far as commentary on the daily readings is concerned. I hope to finish posting Father Callan’s Notes on First Corinthians (scroll down) and continue posting his Notes on Romans.

(2) Some posts are scheduled in advance and will not become available until the time indicated. Posts (or links) lacking time indicators or marked “previously posted” are available regardless of when scheduled (the daily readings, for example). The list of available posts under any given day may be updated with new posts in the late afternoon or evening; these will be marked UPDATE.

SUNDAY, MARCH 27
THIRD SUNDAY OF LENT

Last Weeks Posts (Sunday March 20-Saturday March 26. In case you  missed something.

Resources for Today’s Mass (Third Sunday of Lent). A weekly feature of this blog. Next Sunday’s resources will be posted on Wednesday.

Father Callan on 1 Corinthians 14:21-25. 12:05 AM EST.

Virgin or Young Woman in Isaiah 7:14? A blog post from Peter Williamson, one of the editors of a new commentary series on the NT entitled CATHOLIC COMMENTARY ON SACRED SCRIPTURE.

Father Callan on 1 Corinthians 14:26-40. 12:10 AM EST.

MONDAY, MARCH 28
MONDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

My Notes on Today’s Gospel (Luke 4:24-30). These notes were originally posted for the 4th Sunday of Epiphany in Year C and includes comments on verses 21-23.

Bible Study Podcasts Updated.

Father Callan on 1 Corinthians 15:1-11. 12:05 AM EST.
********************************************************************

TUESDAY, MARCH 29
TUESDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Today’s Gospel. 12:05 AM EST.

Father Callan on 1 Corinthians 15:12-20a. 12:10 AM EST.
********************************************************************

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30
WEDNESDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

Cornelius a Lapide on Today’s Gospel (Matt 5:17-19). 12:05 AM EST.

Mass Resources for the Fourth Sunday of Lent (April 3). 12:10 AM EST.

Father MacIntyre’s Commentary on John 9:1-41 for the Fourth Sunday of Lent.

Father Callan’s Commentary on Ephesians 5:8-14 for the Fourth Sunday of Lent.
*********************************************************************

THURSDAY, MARCH 31
THURSDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Today’s Gospel (Luke 11:14-23). 12:05 AM EST.

Cornelius a Lapide on Galatians 4:22-31.

Bernardin de Piconio on Galatians 4:22-31.

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on John 6:1-15.
*******************************************************************

FRIDAY, APRIL 1
FRIDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

My Notes on Today’s First Reading (Hosea 14:2-10). I hope to post these sometime tomorrow evening, but I ain’t promisin’ nothin’.

Patristic Commentary on Hosea 14:2-10. This was the first reading used for the Memorial of St Benedict, July 11. Source.

Pope John Paul II on Today’s Psalm (81).

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Today’s Gospel (Mark 12:28-34). 12:05 AM EST.

First Century Christian Books Found in Jordan? H/T to The Sacred Page. Turns out the author of the post was right to urge caution. It appears the books are fake. See here.
******************************************************************

SATURDAY, APRIL 2
SATURDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK OF LENT

Readings.

My Notes on Today’s First Reading (Hosea 6:1-6). This post includes commentary on the last verse of chapter 5 and on verse 7 of chapter 6. To see all my available notes on Hosea go here.

Pope John Paul II on Today’s Psalm (51).

Haydock Commentary on Luke 18:9-14. Previously posted.

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Luke 18:9-14. Previously posted.

Cornelius a Lapide on Luke 18:9-14. Previously posted.

Satan Has a Blog. And he’s brutally honest! especially about political correctness.

 

Some Notes On The Marriage Of Hosea The Prophet

Preliminaries on the Marriage of Hosea and Gomer.

Bernhard Anderson writes: “The key to the interpretation of Hosea’s message is the story of his marriage to Gomer.  This story, however, which is found in the first three chapters of the book of Hosea, presents one of the most difficult problems in Old Testament studies.” (Understanding The Old Testament, pg 284).  Father Wilfred Harrington, O.P., writes along the same lines, noting that the foundational chapters of 1-3 provide “just enough data to establish one of the thorniest problems in the Old Testament” (Record Of Promise, pg. 183).  Father John McKenzie, in his Dictionary Of The Bible writes: “1-3, which contain the account of the marriage of Hosea and Gomer, raises a number of celebrated exegetical questions, and opinions are almost as numerous as the scholars who have discussed them” (art. “Hosea”).

Needless to say, we cannot here even begin to scratch the surface of the problems.  I would suggest reading the introduction to the Book of Hosea found in The New Catholic Commentary On Holy Scripture, which gives a good, succinct summary of some of the major views.  Also, Mckenzie’s Article on Hosea in his previously mentioned Dictionary.  One can also profitably consult pages 8-10 of this PDF document written by Duane A. Garrett of the Canadian Baptist Seminary.

Concerning III. A Garrett writes: “God commanded Hosea to marry an immoral woman.  He did so, and she gave him one son but soon returned to her old ways and bore him two children of doubtful paternity (1:2-9).  Hosea then apparently separated from her or was abandoned by her (2:2a).  She fell into poverty and disgrace, and eventually into slavery.  Hosea bought her out of slavery and restored he to the family (3:1-3).” (Please note that chapter and verse numberings for Hosea differ in various translations)

Concerning III. B Garrett writes: “Essentially the same as III. A., (of which it is) a variant interpretation (which) seeks to avoid the scandal of God commanding Hosea to marry a flagrantly immoral woman by asserting that the reference to Gomer’s immorality in 1:2 is proleptic, or that when he married her she had tendencies to immorality but had not yet actually engaged in extramarital sex, or that Hosea did not deliberately marry a wanton woman but only retrospectively realized that his unhappy marriage was actually, in the providence of God, a portrayal of God’s relationship to Israel.”

What’s my position?  I would point out that Hosea’s marriage is a prophetic mirror of God’s relation to Israel, something which very few commentators today (if there are any at all) would deny.  I would point out that the people whom God would “marry” were originally involved in idolatry in Egypt, and God freed them from this by leading them into the desert and “marrying” them, i.e., enter into a covenant with them.  I would note that in 2:16-17 Israel is portrayed as a wife who had originally been faithful in the desert.  I would also point out that God could not have been ignorant of the fact that his wife Israel would fall into harlotry.  When God set before His people the blessings and the curses of the covenant (Deut 11:26-32; 28:1-45), He knew full well that both would befall Israel: “WHEN ALL THESE THINGS which I have set before you, the blessings AND THE CURSES, ARE FULFILLED IN YOU…” (Deut 30:1).  From this I would conclude the following (I should note I’m relying on others for all of this):

1. Hosea is being asked to undergo in a marriage the experience God knowingly underwent in His covenant relations with His people.  Any discussion of the status of Gomer must (so it seems to me) take into account the history of the covenant, which necessarily begins with the people living in idolatry in Egypt.

2.  God knowingly took a harlot (idolatrous) people into a marriage (covenant), and Hosea is being asked to knowingly take a sexually promiscuous woman as a wife (1:2).

3.  The harlot “wife” of God responded with fidelity, at least for a time, as did the harlot wife of Hosea (note that the prophet is clearly identified as the father of Gomer’s first child 1:3).

4. Just as God’s “wife” fell into idolatry (often compared in the Bible to sexual infidelity), so too would the prophets wife (note the paternity of the second and third child of Gomer is not mentioned.  This ambiguity implies what becomes explicit in their names: “Not Pitied” and “Not My People” [1:6, 8]).

5. As a result of her covenant infidelity there is a rupture in the “marriage” between God and His “wife”; just as there is a rupture in Hosea’s marriage.  See chapter 2:1-8 where the actions of Gomer and the symbolic names of the last two children are applied to God’s relation with His “wife” (the nation of Israel which has un-covenanted itself), and her children, the product of her harlotry (covenant infidelity).

6. This rupture (divorce?) is intended as medicinal.  God/Hosea (the symbol and reality are becoming merged) no longer supports the wife and she will come to find that her lovers are now of little use to her, and so she will return to her husband (2:9-25)

7. For this reason God commands Hosea to take back his wife and submit her to a period of testing, as he will do with Israel (chapter 3).

Further Notes On Hosea 1:1 (with introductory materials)

My notes on Hosea can be viewed by clicking on NOTES ON HOSEA in the link field under this blog’s title.

Suggested Background Reading:

Before undertaking a study of the prophets it is important to be aware of certain theological, historical, themes.  Here is a suggested reading list:

The law of the king (Deuteronomy 17:14-20). The kings over God’s people were supposed to obey certain laws. These included not making military and economic alliances with foreign kings. Such alliances involved swearing oaths to the foreigner’s gods and were usually sealed by a marriage.

The rise and fall of Solomon (1 Kings 1-11). At the very least, chapter 9:1-9 and chapter 11 should be read and compared to Deut 17:14-20 which was linked to above.

The political division of the kingdom (1 Kings 12:1-25). Solomon’s son, Rehoboam, decides to continue his late father’s policies with disastrous results. Ten tribes rebel against the tribe of Judah (to which David and his descendants belonged) thus bringing into existence the new kingdom which retained the name Israel. The tribe of Judah, along with the tribe of Benjamin, remained under the authority of the Davidic kings and become known as the Kingdom of Judah. The text implies that Rehoboam could have avoided the division of the kingdom by taking a different course than he did in fact take.

The religious rebellion of Jeroboam I (1 Kings 12:26-13:34). Though God willed the political division of the kingdom, he still expected the people of the new Northern Kingdom of Israel to offer sacrifice in the temple at Jerusalem in accordance with the law given to Moses (Deut 12:1-14). Jeroboam I, the first king of the new state , apparently feared that if his subjects continued to go to Jerusalem (the capital of Judah) to worship, they would be tempted to reunite with the south, so he decided to erect two sanctuaries in his own kingdom where the people could offer sacrifice. Worse still, he had two golden altars manufactured in the shape of bulls; this was reminiscent of the Egyptian god Apsis and the golden calf of the Exodus. Recall that Jeroboam I had been in exile in Egypt which is where he probably got the idea for the bull altars (1 Kings 11:40).

Notes On Hosea 1:1 (The Superscription)

Hosea 1:1 Superscription:  A word of Jehovah that hath been unto Hosea (literal).   The word of the LORD that came unto Hosea the son of Beeri (RSV).    “The word of the Lord was unto X” is stock prophetic phrasing, found throughout the OT, and, on occasion, in the New (Lk 3:2).  The past tense emphasizes that the prophetic mission of the Prophet was from God and, by implication, that the words recorded in the book are of the same origin and have the same authority. “Hosea, at the very beginning of his prophecy, declares that all this, which he delivered, came not from his own mind but from God.  As St Paul says, ‘Paul an apostle, not of men neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father’ (Gal 1:1).  he refers all to God, and claims all obedience to Him.  That word came to him; it existed then before in the mind of God.  It was first God’s, then it became the Prophets, receiving it from God” (E.B. Pusey).

Hosea: virtually the same as the names Joshua, Hoshea, and Jesus.  The name means salvation, or God is salvation.  “Nothing certain is known concerning the life of the prophet; (Note: The traditional accounts are very meagre, and altogether unsupported. According to Pseudepiphanius, De vitis prophet. c. xi., Pseudo-Doroth. De prophetis, c. i., and in a Scholion before Ephr. Syri Explan. in Hos., he sprang from Belemoth, or Belemōn, or Beelmoth, in the tribe of Issachar, and is said to have died and been buried there. On the other hand, according to a tradition current among the inhabitants of Thessalonica, found in הקבלה שׁלשׁלת, he died in Babylon. According to an Arabian legend, it was not far from Tripolis, viz., in the city of Almenia; whilst the Arabs also point out a grave, which is supposed to be his, in the land to the east of the Jordan, on the site of Ramoth Gilead; cf. Simson, der Prophet Hosea, p. 1ff.)” [Keil & Delitzsch].

in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel.  Establishes the time period of the prophets ministry.  “According to the title of the book, Osee (This is the Greek spelling of Hosea) prophesied during the reign of Jeroboam II in Israel, and in the time of Ozias, Joatham, Achaz, and Ezechias, kings of Juda, hence from about 750 to 725 B.C. The title, however, is not quite satisfactory and does not seem to be the original one, or, at least, to have been preserved in its primitive form. None of the historical allusions with which the prophecy is filled appears to be connected with any event later than the reign of Manahem (circa 745-735); there is nothing concerning the Syro-Ephraimite war against Juda, nor the terrible intervention of Tiglath-Pileser III (734-733). The era of the Prophet, therefore, if it is to be judged from his writings, ought to be placed about 750-735; he was perhaps contemporaneous with the closing years of Amos and certainly with the first appearance of Isaias. The reign of Jeroboam II was marked by great and glorious external prosperity; but this prosperity contributed to make the political and religious decadence more rapid. Political dissolution was approaching. Zachary, son of Jeroboam, was assassinated after a reign of six months. His murderer, Sellum, retained the sceptre but one month, and was put to death by Manahem, who occupied the throne for ten years, 745-735. Israel was hastening to its ruin, which was to be completed by the taking of Samaria by Sargon (722)” (Catholic Encyclopedia @ New Advent).  http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11337a.htm

A Brief Overview of the Northern Kingdom of Israel During the Time of Hosea (e.g., from circa 750 BC to the fall of the Kingdom in 722)
The time, during which Hosea prophesied, was the darkest period in the history of the kingdom of Israel. Jeroboam II was almost the last king who ruled in it by the appointment of God. The promise of God to Jehu 2Ki_10:30 in reward of his partial obedience, that his 2Ki_15:8 “children of the fourth generation should sit on the throne of Israel,” expired with Jeroboam’s son, who reigned but for 6 months (see 2Ki_15:10, 2Ki_15:14, 2Ki_15:25, 2Ki_15:30) after an anarchy of 11 years. The rest of Hosea’s life was passed amid the decline of the kingdom of Israel. Politically all was anarchy or misrule; kings made their way to the throne through the murder of their predecessors, and made way for their successors through their own 2Ki_15:8. Shallum killed Zechariah; Menahem killed Shallum; Pekah killed the son of Menahem; Hoshea killed Pekah. The whole kingdom of Israel was a military despotism, and, as in the Roman empire, those in command came to the throne. Baasha, Zimri, Omri, Jehu, Menahem, Pekah, held military office before they became kings  2Ki_16:14. Pekah was a captain of Romaliah 2 Kings 16:25) [Albert Barnes]

A More Detailed Overview:   When Hosea was called to be a prophet, the kingdom of the ten tribes of Israel had been elevated to a position of great earthly power by Jeroboam II. Even under Joash the Lord had had compassion upon the children of Israel, and had turned to them again for the sake of His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; so that Joash had been able to recover the cities, which Hazael of Syria had conquered in the reign of his father Jehoahaz, from Benhadad the son of Hazael, and to restore them to Israel (2Ki_8:23-25). The Lord sent still further help through Jeroboam the son of Joash. Because He had not yet spoken to root out the name of Israel under heaven, He gave them victory in war, so that they were able to conquer Damascus and Hamath again, so far as they had belonged to Judah under David and Solomon, and to restore the ancient boundaries of Israel, from the province of Hamath to the Dead Sea, according to the word of Jehovah the God of Israel, which He had spoken through His servant the prophet Jonah (2Ki_14:25-28). But this revival of the might and greatness of Israel was only the last display of divine grace, through which the Lord sought to bring back His people from their evil ways, and lead them to repentance. For the roots of corruption, which the kingdom of Israel had within it from its very commencement, were not exterminated either by Joash or Jeroboam. These kings did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who had caused Israel to sin, any more than their predecessors (2Ki_13:11; 2Ki_14:24). Jehu, the founder of this dynasty, had indeed rooted out Baal from Israel; but he had not departed from the golden calves at Bethel and Dan, through the setting up of which Jeroboam the son of Nebat had led Israel into sin (2Ki_10:28-29). Nor did his successors take any more care to walk in the law of Jehovah, the God of Israel, with all their heart. Neither the severe chastisements which the Lord inflicted upon the people and the kingdom, by delivering Israel up to the power of Hazael king of Syria and his son Benhadad, in the time of Jehu and Jehoahaz, causing it to be smitten in all its borders, and beginning to cut off Israel (2Ki_10:32-33; 2Ki_13:3); nor the love and grace which He manifested towards them in the reigns of Joash and Jeroboam, by liberating them from the oppression of the Syrians, and restoring the former greatness of the kingdom, – were sufficient to induce the king or the people to relinquish the worship of the calves. This sin of Jeroboam, however, although it was Jehovah who was worshipped under the symbol of the calf, was a transgression of the fundamental law of the covenant, which the Lord had made with Israel, and therefore was a formal departure from Jehovah the true God. And Jeroboam the son of Nebat was not content with simply introducing images or symbols of Jehovah, but had even banished from his kingdom the Levites, who opposed this innovation, and had taken men out of the great body of the people, who were not sons of Levi, and made them priests, and had gone so far as to change the time of celebrating the feast of tabernacles from the seventh month to the eighth (1Ki_12:31-32), merely for the purpose of making the religious gulf which separated the two kingdoms as wide as possible, and moulding the religious institutions of his kingdom entirely according to his own caprice. Thus the worship of the people became a political institution, in direct opposition to the idea of the kingdom of God; and the sanctuary of Jehovah was changed into a king’s sanctuary (Amos 12:13). But the consequences of this image-worship were even worse than these. Through the representation of the invisible and infinite God under a visible and earthly symbol, the glory of the one true God was brought down within the limits of the finite, and the God of Israel was placed on an equality with the gods of the heathen. This outward levelling was followed, with inevitable necessity, by an inward levelling also. The Jehovah worshipped under the symbol of an ox was no longer essentially different from the Baals of the heathen, by whom Israel was surrounded; but the difference was merely a formal one, consisting simply in a peculiar mode of worship, which had been prescribed in His revelation of Himself, but which could not lay the foundation of any permanently tenable party-wall. For, whilst the heathen were accustomed to extend to the national Deity of Israel the recognition which they accorded to the different Baals, as various modes of revelation of one and the same Deity; the Israelites, in their turn, were also accustomed to grant toleration to the Baals; and this speedily passed into formal worship. “Outwardly, the Jehovah-worship still continued to predominate; but inwardly, the worship of idols rose almost into exclusive supremacy. When once the boundary lines between the two religions were removed, it necessarily followed that that religion acquired the strongest spiritual force, which was most in accordance with the spirit of the nation. And from the very corruptions of human nature this was not the strict Jehovah religion, which being given by God did not bring down God to the low level of man, but sought to raise man up to its own lofty height, placing the holiness of God in the centre, and founding upon this the demand for holiness which it made upon its professors; but the voluptuous, sensual teaching of idolatry, pandering as it did to human corruption, just because it was from this it had originally sprung” (Hengstenberg’s Christology). This seems to explain the fact, that whereas, according to the prophecies of Amos and Hosea, the worship of Baal still prevailed in Israel under the kings of the house of Jehu, according to the account given in the books of Kings Jehu had rooted out Baal along with the royal house of Ahab (a Kings 10:28). Jehu had merely broken down the outward supremacy of the Baal worship, and raised up the worship of Jehovah once more, under the symbols of oxen or calves, into the state-religion. But this worship of Jehovah was itself a Baal-worship, since, although it was to Jehovah that the legal sacrifices were offered, and although His name was outwardly confessed, and His feasts were observed (Hos_2:13), yet in heart Jehovah Himself was made into a Baal, so that the people even called Him their Baal (Hos_2:16), and observed “the days of the Baals” (Hos_2:13).
This inward apostasy from the Lord, notwithstanding which the people still continued to worship Him outwardly and rely upon His covenant, had of necessity a very demoralizing influence upon the national life. With the breach of the fundamental law of the covenant, viz., of the prohibition against making any likeness of Jehovah, or worshipping images made by men, more especially in consequence of the manner in which this prohibition was bound up with the divine authority of the law, all reverence not only for the holiness of the law of God, but for the holy God Himself, was undermined. Unfaithfulness towards God and His word begot faithlessness towards men. With the neglect to love God with all the heart, love to brethren also disappeared. And spiritual adultery had carnal adultery as its inevitable consequence, and that all the more because voluptuousness formed a leading trait in the character of the idolatry of Hither Asia. Hence all the bonds of love, of chastity, and of order were loosened and broken, and Hosea uttered this complaint: “There is no truthfulness, and no love, and no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing, and murder, and stealing, and adultery; they break out, and blood reaches to blood” (Hos_4:1-2). No king of Israel could put an effectual stop to this corruption. By abolishing the worship of the calves, he would have rendered the very existence of the kingdom doubtful. For if once the religious wall of division between the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah had been removed, the political distinction would have been in danger of following. And this was really what the founder of the kingdom of the ten tribes feared (1Ki_12:27), inasmuch as the royal family that occupied the throne had received no promise from God of permanent continuance. Founded as it was in rebellion against the royal house of David, which God Himself had chosen, it bore within itself from the very first the spirit of rebellion and revolution, and therefore the germs of internal self-destruction. Under these circumstances, even the long, and in outward respects very prosperous, reign of Jeroboam II. could not possibly heal the deep-seated evils, but only helped to increase the apostasy and immorality; since the people, whilst despising the riches of the goodness and mercy of God, looked upon their existing prosperity as simply a reward for their righteousness before God, and were therefore confirmed in their self-security and sins. And this was a delusion which false prophets loved to foster by predictions of continued prosperity (cf. Hos_9:7). The consequence was, that when Jeroboam died, the judgments of God began to burst upon the incorrigible nation. There followed, first of all, an anarchy of eleven or twelve years; and it was not till after this that his son Zechariah succeeded in ascending the throne. But at the end of no more than six months he was murdered by Shallum, whilst he in his turn was put to death after a reign of one month by Menahem, who reigned ten years at Samaria (2Ki_15:14, 2Ki_15:17). In his reign the Assyrian king Phul invaded the land, and was only induced to leave it by the payment of a heavy tribute (2Ki_15:19-20). Menahem was followed by his son Pekachiah in the fiftieth year of Uzziah’s reign; but after a reign of hardly two years he was murdered by his charioteer, Pekah the son of Remaliah, who held the throne for twenty years (2Ki_15:22-27), but who accelerated the ruin of his kingdom by forming an alliance with the king of Syria to attack the brother kingdom of Judah (Isaiah 7.). For king Ahaz, when hard pressed by Pekah and the Syrians, called to his help the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser, who not only conquered Damascus and destroyed the Syrian kingdom, but took a portion of the kingdom of Israel, viz., the whole of the land to the east of the Jordan, and carried away its inhabitants into exile (2Ki_15:29). Hoshea the son of Elah conspired against Pekah, and slew him in the fourth year of the reign of Ahaz; after which, an eight years’ anarchy threw the kingdom into confusion, so that it was not till the twelfth year of Ahaz that Hoshea obtained possession of the throne. Very shortly afterwards, however, he came into subjection to the Assyrian king Shalmanezer, and paid him tribute. But after a time, in reliance upon the help of Egypt, he broke his oath of fealty to the king of Assyria; whereupon Shalmanezer returned, conquered the entire land, including the capital, and led Israel captive into Assyria (2Ki_15:30; 2Ki_17:1-6) [Keil & Delitzsch].

Resources for further reading:

The Jewish Encyclopedia. (Useful but dated)

The Catholic Encyclopedia. (also dated but useful)

Old Testament Prophets. A good on-line introductory audio series by Father Mitch Pacwa. For background on Hosea listen to shows # 1; 16; 22-25. Requires Real Player in order to be listened to. Real Player can be downloaded and used for free here.

Reading the Old Testament. A good, non-technical, Protestant introduction. Click on the headings “Assyrian period” and “Hosea.” You may also wish to read “Amos”. He was an earlier prophet to the northern kingdom and it seems likely that his ministry and Hosea’s overlapped by at least a few years.

A good map which allows you to situate the extent of the Assyrian empire on a map of the Middle-East of today can be found here.

Here is a map showing the extent of David’s kingdom at the time of his death.

Here is a map of the Divided Kingdoms of Israel and Judah circa 830 BC. This would place the details on the map in relation to Hosea’s ministry circa 750-725 BC. Although both kingdoms lost territory after the division they had, by Hosea’s day, gained virtually all of it back. In other words, combine the land area of the two kingdoms and it is almost exactly the same as in the days of David.

Hosea 9:10-13

Note: Mousing onto the blue links will cause a pop-up box to appear with the cited text according to the Douay Rheims translation. The box will allow you to view the text in several other versions. Red/orange links must be clicked on.

Vote for this post on Pickafig

Hosea 9:10 I found Israel like grapes in the desert, I saw their fathers like the first fruits of the fig tree. The reference to “first fruits” a “grapes” shows that the prophet still has the theme of the harvest feast of Tabernacles in mind (see previous post). The feast of Tabernacles was dedicated to God and celebrated the fall harvest in recognition that the fruits of the land-and indeed, the land itself-were gifts from God. However, the people had perverted this celebration with Baalism. Baal was a fertility god who was worshiped with sexual rites. In performing these rites the devotees believed that baal would send down the rain, conceived of as his seed (sperm) and impregnate the land, making it fertile. For more on Baal see my comments on Hosea 1:2 here. For more on Tabernacles see my comments on Hosea 9:1-9; especially those on verse 1.

Finding grapes in the desert and the coming of the first fruits of the fig tree are things to take great joy in; and joy was one of the hallmarks of the Tabernacles feast. God, in describing Israel in this fashion is witnessing to their initial devotion to Him, a theme already alluded to in the second half of Hosea 2:17. God once took delight in his people, as the farmer delights in and celebrates the first fruits of the harvest, but they went in to Beelphegor (i.e., Baal-Peor) and alienated themselves to that confusion, and became abominable, as those things were, which they loved.

In Numbers 25:1-18 we read of the crime of Baal-Peor and its aftermath. At the time of the Feast of Tabernacles the people would reflect upon the events in the desert, especially recalling the various rebellions narrated in Exodus 16-17; 32-34; Numbers 11-25. The events at Baal-Peor are, as it were, the capstone upon these rebellions.

They alienated themselves to that confusion. The text reads literally: “They consecrated themselves to shame. Consecration is a cultic word meaning “set apart.” The idea was that Israel was to be consecrated, set apart from all that was profane, instead, they set (alienated) themselves apart from God by the rites of Baal, who is here described as “shame.” This word is used to describe Baal in Jeremiah 3:24; 11:13. As a result of this “consecration,” the people became “abominable,” like “those things were, which they loved.” The term translated here as “abominable” is shiqquwts, which is pronounced shik-kuts, an obvious word-play on the Hebrew word for Taernacles: Sukkuth. The term “abominable is often employed in reference to idols (Deut 29:16; Isaiah 66:3).

Hosea 9:11 As for Ephraim, their glory hath flown away like a bird from birth, and from the womb, and from conception. See the NAB and RSV translations offered in the pop-up box. Ephraim was the largest of the tribes of the northern kingdom and is, as here, often used to refer to the entire kingdom. Children are described here as “glory,” but it is a glory that has (or will) fled away from the people. The irony is obvious: having participated in pagan fertility rites the people of God will become infertile (see the covenant curses in Deut 28:18).

Hosea 9:12 And though they should bring up their children, I will make them without children among men. This could be taken two ways: (1) the childlessness threatened in the previous verse will effect the people’s existing children (i.e., their children will have no children), or, (2) the children will begin to die off. The NAB translation supports #1, while the RSV supports #2.

Yea, and woe to them, when I shall depart from them. The flying away of the glory of children will be the result of God’s departure from the people. One of the hallmarks of the feast of Tabernacles is that it celebrated God’s presence with the people. This presence was manifested by God’s glory (Exodus 33:18; 1 Kings 8:11). The departure of that glory/presence was a sign of disfavor. See Ezekiel chapters 10 and 11 where the departure of God’s glory from Jerusalem signifies the impending doom of the city (avoid the NAB translation here).

Hosea 9:13 The Douay-Rheims (like the NAB) is translating the Hebrew text of this verse. For a translation of the Greek see the RSV. The nation, once as beautiful and prosperous as Tyre, will suffer defeat at the hands of an enemy (“the murderer”). Tyre was an island nation devoted to the worship of Baal, and it naturally attributed its fortunes to this devotion. King Ahab (Achab) of Israel was married to Jezebel (Jezabel), a Tyrian who supported the cult of Baal in Israel with disastrous consequences

Notes on Hosea 9:1-9

Note: mousing onto the blue links will cause a pop-up box to appear containing the cited biblical text in the Douay-Rheims version. You do not have to “click on” the link. The pop-up box will allow you to view the text in several different versions. The DR version is the default setting.

VOTE FOR THIS POST HERE.

Hosea 9:1 Rejoice not, O Israel: rejoice not as the nations do. The reference to the cornfloor (threshingfloor) in this verse, along with the reference to wine in verse 2, and “They shall not dwell in the Lord’s land” in verse 3, indicates that the prophet has in mind the feast of Sukkoth (also called Feast of Ingathering, or Booths, or Tabernacles. See Ex 23:16; Deut 16:13-15; ). This was a harvest festival which was closely connected to the remembrance of the desert wanderings and the gift of the promised land. It was to be a time of thanksgiving, joy, and merrymaking. According to Deut 26:1-11, a person was to bring a basket of items harvested to the place where God chose to dwell (Jerusalem) and give it to the priest while stating: `I declare this day to the LORD your God that I have come into the land which the LORD swore to our fathers to give us.’ The priest was to take the basket and place it before the altar, at which point the offerer was to recite the following: `A wandering Aramean was my father (i.e. Abraham); and he went down into Egypt and sojourned there, few in number; and there he became a nation, great, mighty, and populous. 6 And the Egyptians treated us harshly, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage. 7 Then we cried to the LORD the God of our fathers, and the LORD heard our voice, and saw our affliction, our toil, and our oppression; 8 and the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror, with signs and wonders; 9 and he brought us into this place and gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey. 10 And behold, now I bring the first of the fruit of the ground, which thou, O LORD, hast given me.’

Note the close connection between the wandering and exile status of the people in times past, and the current possession of the land.

The Israelites are told to rejoice not as the nations do because they have been unfaithful to God, loving a harlot’s hire upon every threshing floor. Pagan harvest celebrations, especially those connected to the fertility god Baal, took place at threshing floors as a matter of convenience, for it was at such places that the grain was separated from the stalks. They also took place at wine presses as well (vs 2). The rites often involved sexual practices. By engaging in such rites on the pretext of celebrating the feast of Tabernacles, the people were committing harlotry against the covenant with God, which was often portrayed in term of marriage. Covenant infidelity thus came to be compared to marital infidelity, an important aspect of this book (see Hosea 2:1-25).

Hosea 9:2 The (threshing) floor and the winpress shall not feed them, and the wine shall deceive them. Recalls the threats in chapter 2. God will take away the land’s abundance as a sign that He-not the Baals-is responsible for the fruitful harvest.

The wine shall deceive them. “Deceive” could also be translated as “fail”; many think this is a better translation (but see Hosea 4:10-11; Isaiah 5:11-12). An abundance of wine was a sign of God’s favor (Deut 7:13; Hosea :10; Proverbs 3:7-12). Lack of wine was a sign of God’s displeasure (Deut 28:30, 39; Hosea 2:11; Amos 5:11).

Hosea 9:3 They shall not dwell in the Lord’s land. Once again the threat of exile looms (see Hosea 7:12, 16; 8:13).

Ephraim is returned to Egypt, and hath eaten unclean things among the Assyrians. The RSV reads: “But Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean food in Assyria.” Is and hath in the DR version reflects the tenses used in both the Hebrew and Greek versions of the prophet, however, often in the prophets tenses denoting existing (i.e., is) or accomplished (i.e., hath, has) facts are used of future realities, emphasizing that what is being promised, threatened, or stated will in fact occur. Such a meaning is brought out by the RSV, NAB, and other translations. “Ephraim shall return to Egypt” does not mean that Israel will be exiled there. Egypt, because of the Hebrew’s experience of bondage to the Egyptians and their god’s, became a metaphor for bondage to any pagan nation and its gods. Assyria will become the new Egypt, a new place of bondage for Israel.

Note that the threat of exile and the eating of unclean food indicates a reversal of what the Feast of Tabernacles celebrated.

Hosea 9:4 They shall not offer wine to the Lord. Libations of wine were a prominent ritual during Tabernacles. The people were engaging in the worship of God as a mere pretext, but even this pretext will be taken away.

Their sacrifices shall be like the bread of mourners. The joy of the Feast of Tabernacles will come to an end because the people have perverted it. This is a reference to the pagan practice of offering bread to the dead (see Deut 26:14). In an Exile situation all sacrificial meat would become unclean.

All that eat thereof shall be polluted: for their bread for their soul shall not come into the house of the Lord. The DR translation used here is over-literal, and does not take account of the various meanings of the Hebrew nephesh., or its Greek equivalent. The RSV reads: “For their bread shall be for their hunger only; it shall not come into the house of the Lord.” The NAB reads: Such food as they have shall be for themselves; it cannot enter the house of the Lord.” Since nephesh can mean “life”, the text is probably meant to indicate that the food the people eat will be of benefit only for their temporal well-being (“for themselves”, “for their hunger only”). It can and will have no sacrificial value and cannot enter the house (temple) of God, which the people would be separated from anyways, in the event of exile.

Hosea 8:5 Even if they desire to celebrate the feast correctly, in exile there will be no opportunity to do so.

Hosea 9:6 They are gone because of destruction (Note the present tense; see note on vs 3) refers to the people no longer being in the promised land, unable to go to the temple of Jerusalem for the proper worship of God on the feast. This will surely come about because Egypt shall gather them together, Memphis shall bury them. As already noted, Egypt is a symbolic reference to exile. Memphis was a leading city of Egypt. In the prophet’s mind, Egypt is a symbol of Assyria where the people will die in exile.

Nettles shall inherit their precious silver, the bur shall be in their tabernacles. In Hosea 2:8 we read that God had given the people their silver, but they attributed it to the Baals. In Hosea 8:4 we read that with the silver they made idols. This pagan paraphernalia will be left behind when they go into exile (see Isaiah 2:18-20). The Garden land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:8) will become a wasteland, overgrown by weeds. Inherit represents the Hebrew word yarash, which can also mean “take possession” or “impoverish.” The last possibility is, I think, the best. The idols of the fertility gods who were thought to give the land its fruitful abundance will be impoverished by worthless growth. Their nothingness will then be seen. The tabernacles where the people once dwelt to celebrate the feast of Tabernacles (which they perverted) will become overgrown with thorns. The fact that thorns will dwell in the tabernacles (i.e., dwellings) where the people were to dwell in thanksgiving for the inheritance of the garden land and its produce is highly ironic. Reflected in this passage is the disobedience of Adam (Gen 3:17-19, 23).

Hosea 9:7 The days of visitation…the days of repaying are come. God is about to manifest his judgment against the people.

Know ye, O Israel, that the prophet was foolish…for the multitude of thy iniquity, and the multitude of thy madness. Intense sarcasm. In Hosea 4:5-6 the prophets were condemned for willfully rejecting knowledge of God and His law. The people were in fact not unaware of this: “The prophet was foolish, the spiritual man was mad, FOR the multitude of thy iniquity, and the multitude of thy madness.” It appears that the prophets had succumbed to the will of the people, telling them what they wanted to hear, rather than what they needed to hear (Concerning the northern kingdom’s rejection of prophecy see Amos 2:12; Amos 7:10-17).

Hosea 9:8 The watchman of Ephraim (i.e., the prophets to the northern kingdom of Israel), was with my God (once faithful), but now: the prophet is become a snare of ruin upon all his (Ephraim’s) ways. Madness is in the house of his God. “House” here refers to the northern kingdom rather than to the temple in Jerusalem. Madness means insanity, here understood as a willful rejection of the knowledge of God. The word could also be translated as hatred. It should be noted that many modern translations and commentators amend this rather difficult verse so that it reads as a rejection of the prophets by the people.

Hosea 9:9 Gabaa in the DR version means Gibeah, the birthplace of Saul, the first King of the chosen people (1 Sam 10:17-26); he was also a prophet (1 Sam 10:9-13) and proved to be a stinker at both. He usurped the priestly/prophetic function of Samuel and, as a consequence, lost any chance of maintaining his kingship or establishing a dynasty (1 Sam 10:8, 13:8-14). He fell into insanity which manifested itself in hatred against David (1 Sam 18:6-16). The reference to Gabaa (Gibeah) suggests Hosea’s dissatisfaction with the prophets and monarchs of the northern kingdom. Gibeah was also the place of a heinous sexual crime in judges 19:22-28. The events instigated there culminated in the event at Shiloh, where women were kidnapped to become wives. This took place during the Feast of Tabernacles (Judges 21:15-25). This last passage ends with the words “In those days their was no king in Israel; everyone did what he thought best.” The implication is that a worthy monarch could have avoided the happening of such events. All in all, the reference to Gabaa (Gibeah) show the prophet’s abhorrence of the incompetence of the prophetic and royal powers in the north.

Notes on Hosea 8:5-14

Please vote for this post HERE.

Note: One only needs to mouse onto the blue colored links for the biblical text cited to appear (no clicking required). The cited text will appear in a pop-up box and offers several different versions of the text; the default being the Douay-Rheims translation. Links in Orange/red must be “clicked on.”

Hosea 8:5 Here begins the Prophets account of the Lord’s speech to Israel. The NAB reads “Cast away your calf, O Samaria!” This is a possible rendering, but the text could also be taken as “He (i.e., God) has rejected your calf, O Samaria!” ” Either way it is apparent that the false worship in Samaria is going to take another beating. However one chooses to translate the Hebrew zanahti here, a clear link is provided with verse 3 which spoke of the Israelites having “rejected” or “thrown away” (Hebrew: zanah) that which was good for them (the right worship of God).

The calf of Samaria. According to 1 Kings 12:26-33, Jeroboam, son of Nebat (i.e., Jeroboam the first, 922-901 BC), established cultic shrines (temples) at Dan and Bethel. There is little biblical evidence for there being a cultic center in the city of Samaria, though it should be noted that Samaria did not become the capitol of the northern kingdom until the reign of Omri, some fifty years after the time of Jeroboam. It would be highly unusual for a captiol to be without such a center. It should also be noted that a nations capitol is often named as a synonym for the whole nation; in such a case, “the calf of Samaria” could refer to all the shrines of false worship in the northern kingdom. In Hosea 10:5 the people of Samaria are said to fear for the calf of Beth-aven, a pejorative term for the cultic center at Bethel.

My wrath is kindled against them. What follows gives some of the reasons for God’s anger.

How long will the be incapable of being cleansed? This is certainly a reference to their insincere conversion and false piety (see Hosea 6:1-10).

Hosea 8:6 For itself is an invention of Israel. This is probably meant to convey the idea that the falseness of the calf idol is an invention, unreal, like their piety and conversion.

A workman mad it, and it is no god. No doubt meant to recall the prohibition against idols (Exodus 20:4-5; Deut 5:8-10). Man made idols were often ridiculed by the wise men and prophets of God (Wisdom 10:13-19; Isaiah 44:9-20).

The calf of Samaria shall be turned into spider’s webs. Other translations read “shall be broken in pieces,” or “shall go up in flames.” I suspect the last possibility is the most likely, since it links nicely with the statement that God’s wrath is kindled in verse 5.

Hosea 8:7 Idols are as empty and transitory as the wind, and one reaps what one sows. The wind image highlights the “vacuous nature” of idolatry (Marvin Sweeney). According to the book of Deuteronomy, the people were ensured of abundant and fruitful harvests if they maintained a right relationship with God under terms of His covenant (Deut 28:4). Failure to do this would bring crop failure (Deut 28:15-18, 38-44). Part of the problem in Israel was that its false worship of the true God-bad enough in itself- was often synchronized with worship of Baal, a fertility God who was though to make the land fruitful (Hosea 2:5). In order to prove that it was not the Baal’s who made the land fruitful God promised to show his power over the land (Hosea 2:6-13).

If it should yield, stranger will eat it. See Deut 28:29-33. Note especially verse 33 of the text.

Hosea 8:8 Israel is swallowed up… among the nations. Those who thought they consumed the fruits of the promised land by the power of the Baal’s will be swallowed up by idolatrous nations. The previous verse threatened despoilment of crops by their enemies, this build upon that with an obvious play on words: “Strangers will eat it…Israel is swallowed up…among the nations.”

Like an unclean vessel. “Vessel” is a term often used for paraphernalia employed in religious observances. Often times, a defeated nation’s temples were pillaged and the objects used in worship were taken to the victor nation’s shrines for display or use in the worship of their gods.

Note: Exile is clearly being threatened here (especially verse 7), but the prophet has a more immediate concern; notice that the wording of verse 8 is present, not future: “Israel is swallowed up.” The immediate concern is with the foreign alliances Israel has made with pagan nations. Such alliances entailed the invoking of these nations gods and will lead to the punishment of exile.

Hosea 8:9-10 Israel is “swallowed up” even now because of its political alliance with Assyria. Yahweh (God) should have been its so lover, however, like a senseless jackass the nation has wandered to other nations (and their gods). Like a harlot it has sought out other lovers (recall the marriage motif in chapters 1-3).

The text of verse 10 is highly problematic and variously translated and interpreted. Gathering could refer to the bringing of the people back from exile (Micah 2:12); but it is also used for the gathering of the people’s lovers (pagan nations) for the purpose of punishment (Ezek 16:37). They shall rest a while from the burden of kings and princes could mean that the people would be given relief from bad rulers. The meaning then could be: “I will gather the people to myself (i.e., lead them to conversion) to avoid their exile; and will do away with their rulers.” If this is the sense, then what is being alluded to here is probably the reunification of the northern kingdom of Israel with the Davidic kingdom of Judah.

However, the word behind the translation “they shall rest” can have sexual connotations. “They shall rest a while from the burden of kings and princes” could also be translated as: “They are profaned a little from sexual relations with kings…” The meaning of the verse then might be: They have hired themselves out as a harlot to the nations, so I will gather them together for judgment, for they have profaned themselves with foreign kings and princes.”

Hosea 8:11 Multiplication of altars was forbidden by Deut 12:4-14.

Hosea 8:12-13 The rendering of verse 12 by the NAB and the RSV is too be preferred to that of the DR translation. The Law of God has been considered something foreign by his people who have chosen foreign gods. Because of this, God has no regard for their sacrifice and will lead the people into exile. In verse 9 the people were said to”go up to Assyria,” as a result, they will now “return to Egypt.” This should not be construed as an actual exile in Egypt, rather, Egypt is the symbol of slavery and servitude to foreigners. The Israelites were already in that situation voluntarily by their alliance with Egypt; the prophet is here suggesting that it would turn worse, and the people would experience something similar to the bondage in Egypt.

Hosea 8:14 The focus of most of the criticism in Hosea is against Israel, but Judah is occasionally critiqued as well. Israel forgot its maker and built many temples. Judah has fortified many citites; the law forbid both the multiplication of temples and militarism. Israel, it would seem, was putting its trust in false gods; whereas Judah was putting its trust in martial arms.

My Notes on Hosea 8:1-4

The text is divided into three parts: A) Verses 1-4, in which God, through his Prophet, announces the charge of Israel’s violation of the covenant; B) verses 5-13a, God, through the prophet, lays down specific charges against Israel; C), verses 13b-14, the punishment of Israel (and Judah) is announced.  In this post I will examine the first part, vss 1-4.
Vs. 1  Set the trumpet to thy mouth.  As an eagle he comes against the house of Yahweh, because they have transgressed my covenant, and trespassed against my law.  As verse 2 makes clear, the words are directed towards Israel.  The reference to the trumpet reminds us of the words addressed to Benjamin in 5:8.  The trumpet (Hebrew: shofar, ram’s horn) was both a cultic instrument, (Ps. 98:6; Num 29:1) and a military alarm/call-to-arms (Num 10:9; Judges 6:34).  The eagle would perhaps read better as vulture, a bird of prey which feasts upon carrion, for Israel, as a result of its breaking of the covenant, will be “swallowed up (vs 8).  The Hebrew nesher  is derived from a root meaning to lacerate, implying any type of bird which rends the flesh of its prey.  Who the he is who comes against the House of Yahweh is is not stated; however, birds of prey, especially the eagle, were symbols used by the Assyrian kings to symbolize their military might.  God, it appears, is threatening to use Assyria as an instrument of punishment for covenant transgression.  The House of Yahweh is probably to be understood as  an ironic reference to the false shrines established in the Northern Kingdom at Dan and Bethel.  The construction of these shrines were soundly condemned by numerous prophets and were not truly the House of Yahweh.  The law laid down that worship and sacrifice was to take place only at the spot chosen by God (see Deut 12:1-14).  Likewise, the law forbid the making of idols, and the sanctuaries in the north contained altars in the shape of bulls or calves, recalling the sin of the golden calf during the Exodus (see vss 5, 6; Ex 32; 1 Kings 12:26-33).  Transgression implies open, known, pre-meditated rebellion.  This makes the following verse rather telling.
Vs 2  They shall cry unto me, ‘My God, we Israel know thee’.  Brings up once again the theme of Israel’s insincerity in its covenant relations with God (see 5:15-6:4).  The text is somewhat awkward, given the singular “my” in conjunction with the plural “we.”

Vs 3  Israel has cast off that which is good; the enemy shall pursue him.  The word translated cast off has the meaning of “throw away” and is a reference to their rejection of God and/or the covenant (recall verse 1).  As has been noted several times in my notes, being pursued by an enemy is one of the major punishments for covenant infidelity as laid down in the Book of Deuteronomy 28.

Vs 4  They have set up kings, but not by me, they have made princes, and I knew it not; with their silver and their gold they have made idols, and so they will be cut off.  The reigning king of Israel at the start of Hosea’s ministry was Jeroboam II, a descendant of King Jehu whom God had established on the throne and to whom he promised a 4 generation line of succession.   To whom then, does the text refer?  To previous or post Jeroboam II kings?  Either is possible, especially the latter.  After the reign of Jeroboam II a series of 6 kings came to the throne over a period of 20 years.  Of that number, 4 were assassinated and two were removed by the Assyrians.  Personally, I like the suggestion of Marvin Sweeney who thinks the kings and princes referred to are a reference to the various political alliances Israel formed with pagan nations.  Israel tended to be subservient in these relationships and, therefore, at the beck and call of these foreign rulers.  As we have already seen in previous notes, the Prophet has condemned such alliances several times.  Such alliances were covenantal and entailed swearing oaths and offering sacrifices to the foreign gods and honoring them in ones own country, hence the statement with their silver and gold they have made idols.  These alliances fostered trade, bringing wealth (silver and gold) to Israel (see 12:1-2).    Having cast off that which is good (God and covenant vs 3) they will in turn be cut off.

Vs 5

Notes on Hosea 7: 13-16

7:13. Woe to them!

For they have wandered from me.

Destruction to them!

For they have trespassed against me.

Though I would redeem them,

yet they have spoken lies against me.

7:14. They haven’t cried to me with their heart,

but they howl on their beds.

They assemble themselves for grain and new wine.

They turn away from me.

7:15. Though I have taught and strengthened their arms,

yet they plot evil against me.

7:16. They return, but not to the Most High.

They are like a faulty bow.

Their princes will fall by the sword for the rage of their tongue.

This will be their derision in the land of Egypt.

Vs 13. Woe to them! For they have wandered from me. “Woe” was originally used as part of a funeral lament. In the prophets it is often employed to announce a coming judgment or highlight a grave situation. The prophet has just described (vss 11-12) Israel as “a silly dove” which flies away to other nations and which he (God) will bring down like a hunter brings down birds with a net. The reference to “wandering” from God builds upon this. Israel, remember, was “playing the harlot” and “running after her lovers” (see 2:7).

vs 13 cont. Destruction to them! For they have trespassed against me. Trespassed translates the Hebrew word pasha (pa-shah), which can refer to both political rebellion (2 Kings 1:1), or religious apostasy (Amos 4:4). In light of their false worship of God, their pagan worship, and their seeking political alliances, one should probably see both meanings intended here (In light of the fact that God was Israel’s true king, the earthly kings being mere representatives, as it were, the idea of political rebellion against God is not far-fetched). Implied in this rebellion is the fact that it has been done knowingly.

Vs 13 cont. Though I would have redeemed them, yet they have spoken lies against me. The reference to redemption calls to mind God’s saving activity in relation to his people in the Exodus (Deut 7:8; 13:6). What lies they have spoken against God is unclear. Possibly the lie consists in the presumptions they had concerning God’s mercy; such conceptions as manifested in 5:15-6:7. Notice that that passage ends in 6:7 with a reference to their treacherous or deceitful dealings with God. This view is confirmed, I think, by the beginning of verse 14:

Vs 14. They haven’t cried to me with their hearts, but they howl on their beds. Instead of proper prayer they simply lament their situation. Marvin Notice the contrast between Crying to God and merely howling. The former (had it actually been done) would have had a direction (to God) and an origin (the heart); whereas the latter has neither. Such emptiness invites “destruction” (vs 13).

Vs 14 cont. They assemble themselves for grain and new wine. They turn away from me. Note the contrast between “assemble” and “turn away.” As we saw in earlier passages, the people were attributing their abundance of grain, wine, and oil, i.e., the produce of the land, to Baal, a fertility god (2:7), rather than THE God (2:10). In holding a cultic assembly to worship Baal they were turning away from God.

Vs 15. Though I have taught and strengthened their arms, they have devised evil against me. A better translation of the last part of this verse would be: “they considered me to be evil.” Throughout the OT, Israel’s military strength and security is dependent upon their fidelity to God, who aids them against their enemies. At the time of Hosea the northern kingdom of Israel had reached the zenith of its military and political power, yet their were indications that the nation’s security was “iffy” at best. God had warned the people in Deuteronomy 28 that if they forgot him and the covenant they would suffer many setbacks and punishments, including military attacks, defeats, and exile. The fact that the nation was often at war, and the looming threat of Assyrian aggression as well, should have been a warning to the people that its relation to God was in jeopardy, instead, it appear that God was accused of lying. Thia accusation could work only because the people had forgotten their own covenant obligations.

Vs 16. They return, but not to the Most High. They are like a faulty bow. The princes will fall by the sword for the rage of their tongues. This will be their derision in the land of Egypt. The first part of the verse actually reads: “they returned to the not high.” “Not high” sounds similar to Baal in Hebrew and is a pejorative term for Baal, who is not high in contrast to THE God who, in the OT is often called “Most High.” Faulty bow (literally, limp, or unstrung) calls to mind the reference in vs 15 to God’s having taught (Hebrew: trained) and strengthened their arms, a military image. Separated from God, their commander-and-chief, they are useless in war. Their princes will fall by the sword because of the rage of their tongues; no doubt a reference to their calling God a liar in the previous verse. In accordance with the warnings laid down in Deuteronomy 28, the people will go into exile, and, for the rage of their tongues they will be derided (an act of the tongue) in Egypt, the original place of exile from whence God delivered them.