Hosea 1:1, 2.

Masoretic Text: The word of YHWH, which came to Hosea, the son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, the kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, the king of Israel. At the beginning, YHWH spoke to Hosea and YHWH said to Hosea, “Go, take a woman of whoredom and children of whoredom, for [the people of] the land whore to an extreme, [turning away] from following YHWH.”

Notes:

Proper names are spelled differently in the Septuagint. In this translation of Hosea, however, the usual spellings have been retained.

In Hebrew and in Greek, the extreme degree to which the people “whored” is conveyed by repeating a form of the word for “whore.”

Regarding the divine name (YHWH), see Psalm 1.

Commentary:

The name Hosea is an abbreviated form of Hoshaiah, which means “saved of Yah [YHWH].” His being called “son of Beeri” does not provide any clue about his background, as this Beeri is not mentioned elsewhere in the Scriptures. When starting to serve as YHWH’s prophet, Hosea was a young man of marriageable age. YHWH’s word or message first came to him while King Uzziah of Judah and King Jeroboam were contemporary rulers. Hosea’s long prophetic activity continued through the complete reigns of Judean kings Jotham and Ahaz, included at least part of the reign of King Hezekiah of Judah, and so may have spanned some 60 years. Contemporary prophets were Isaiah and Micah and probably also Amos and Jonah. (2 Kings 14:25; Isaiah 1:1; Amos 1:1; Micah 1:1)

Hosea does not relate how the word of YHWH came to him. As in the case of other prophets, the message may have been conveyed to him in a dream or vision. The initial message directed Hosea to marry a “woman of whoredom.” The children to whom she would give birth would not all be Hosea’s offspring and, therefore, in advance, are designated as “children of whoredom.” The fact that the children involved a future development may give support to the deduction that the woman whom Hosea was to take as wife would not have been guilty of prostituting herself prior to the marriage.

In view of the widespread idolatry existing among the people, however, there is a strong possibility that the woman whom Hosea was to choose as a wife would be one who had committed prostitution as part of ceremonial rituals. In the time of Elijah, comparatively few Israelites did not engage in the worship of Baal. Although Jehu later suppressed Baal worship, this may only have been directed against the kind Jezebel had introduced or his efforts may have produced only temporary results. (1 Kings 19:18; 2 Kings 10:18-31; 17:7-18)

The unfaithfulness of Hosea’s wife would serve to illustrate the course of the professed people of YHWH in their pursuit of false gods. This constituted a breach of their covenant relationship with YHWH, which bound them to him like a wife to her husband. The extent of unfaithfulness would be revealed even further by the fact that children to whom Hosea’s wife would give birth would not all be his but would include offspring of her adulterous course.

The reading of the Masoretic Text and that of the Septuagint indicate the high degree of the unfaithfulness by the repetition of two forms of the word for “whore.” English translations convey this by such renderings as “the land commits great whoredom” (NRSV), “the land is guilty of the vilest adultery” (NIV), “the land commits flagrant harlotry” (NASB), and “the land is entirely given up to whoredom.” (Darby) In this context, the land denotes the people inhabiting the land which YHWH had given them as a possession. They had abandoned YHWH and prostituted themselves through involvement in idolatrous worship.

Commentary:

Hosea acted on the divine directive and married Gomer. No mention is made of Diblaim elsewhere in the Scriptures, and, therefore, nothing is known about her background. Gomer did bear a son to Hosea, indicating that this son was their legitimate child.

Note: The Hebrew word for “blood” is plural, indicative of the abundant blood that had been shed.

Commentary:

YHWH directed Hosea to name his son “Jezreel,” meaning “God sows.” If, in this case, the significance of the name is linked to its meaning, the thought could be that YHWH would take punitive action, “sowing” or “scattering” the people as exiles away from their land. One of the threatened judgments for unfaithfulness was for the Israelites to be taken into exile and scattered among the nations. (Deuteronomy 28:63, 64) The name Jezreel could embrace this aspect of YHWH’s judgment. Another possibility is that the boy’s name would call attention to what had happened and was about to occur at the location of Jezreel.

The time for an accounting would not be prolonged. Within a short period, divine vengeance would befall the royal “house” or dynasty of Jehu for the blood spilled at Jezreel. Although having served as YHWH’s instrument for destroying the royal house of Ahab at Jezreel, Jehu appears to have acted in keeping with his own ambitions, as suggested by his continuance of calf worship. (2 Kings 9:14-10:11) Just as Nebuchadnezzar was rewarded for his actions against Tyre, so Jehu was rewarded for his role in destroying the idolatrous royal house of Ahab and its loyal supporters. (2 Kings 10:30, 31; Ezekiel 29:17-20) Because of carrying out his own aims, however, Nebuchadnezzar was not freed from accountability for a record of ruthless bloodshed, and neither was the royal house of Jehu.

The “visitation” of judgment came during the brief reign of Zechariah, the fourth king of the royal house of Jehu. Shallum conspired to seize the throne, launched an attack against Zechariah, and killed him. The violent end of Jehu’s dynasty served to “avenge the blood of Jezreel.” (2 Kings 15:8-10)

About fifty years of instability followed. These were marked by repeated assassinations of kings and Assyrian invasions. With the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians, the ten-tribe kingdom of Israel ceased to exist. (2 Kings 15:13-30; 17:1-6)

Commentary:

“That day” is the time when YHWH would execute his adverse judgment. As a weapon, the “bow” evidently represents Israel’s military might or its ability to protect itself against enemies. Situated between the hilly area of Galilee in the north and that of Samaria in the south, the valley of Jezreel stretches in a southeasterly direction from Mount Carmel. What is thought to be the site of ancient Jezreel lies approximately at the midway point of the valley.

When the Assyrians invaded during the reign of Pekah and devastated the northern part of the realm, the power of the ten-tribe kingdom was basically broken. The final blow came during the reign of Hoshea when the Assyrians conquered Samaria, bringing a complete end to the ten-tribe kingdom. (2 Kings 15:29; 17:1-6) During either one of these Assyrian campaigns, Israelite forces may have suffered a decisive defeat in the valley of Jezreel.

Notes:

Instead of a transliteration of the name “Lo-ruhamah,” the Septuagint reading conveys the significance of the name.

The Hebrew reading “house of Israel” evidently designates the people of Israel, as does the Septuagint expression “sons of Israel.”

In the Septuagint, the showing of mercy is negated by two different words for “not” and so signifies “absolutely not,” “by no means,” or “definitely not.”

Although the extant text of the Septuagint preserves the doubling of the words (“opposing I will oppose,” which evidently is to be understood to mean “surely oppose”), the meaning is not the same as the Hebrew “taking I will take” (possibly meaning “surely take away”). The repetition of forms of the same word serves to intensify. In the Septuagint, the reference is to an intense, complete, or utter opposition. While the Septuagint reading conveys a readily understandable meaning, this is not the case with the Masoretic Text. The “taking” has been understood to refer to a “taking away” (as into captivity), throwing away or casting off, or a taking away of sin (by linking this meaning of “taking away” with the “not” preceding the word for “add” [the Hebrew literally reading, “not add still showing mercy”], the significance is “surely not take away”). The Tanakh (JPS) reads, “I will no longer accept the House of Israel or pardon them.” A footnote, however, states: “Meaning of Heb. uncertain; emendation yields “but will disown them.” Other renderings are: “I abhor them utterly.” (NAB) “I will cast them off.” (Luther, German revised edition) “I will certainly take them away.” (HCSB)

Commentary:

Gomer again became pregnant, but the daughter to whom she gave birth is not linked to Hosea (as was Jezreel), suggesting that the girl was not his child. YHWH instructed Hosea to call her Lo-ruhamah (Not-Shown-Mercy). This name would call attention to YHWH’s refusal to show mercy to the people of the ten-tribe kingdom because of their continued record of unfaithfulness. As a people, they had gone beyond the point where repentance was possible. Therefore, YHWH, according to the extant reading of the Septuagint, would take an unchangeable stand against them. Depending upon the significance of the Hebrew text, the meaning could be that he would no longer forgive them, would cast them off, or would cause them to be carried away into exile.

Note: While the basic meaning is the same, the extant Septuagint text is an expanded reading.

Commentary:

Unlike the people of the ten-tribe kingdom who would be abandoned to the consequences of their idolatrous course, the “sons,” “house,” or people of Judah would be shown mercy and delivered from the power seeking their ruin. The deliverance, however, would not be by means of any implements of war or engaging in battle with horses, horsemen, and chariots. Deliverance would be effected solely by YHWH their God.

In the fulfillment, the ten-tribe kingdom ceased to exist when the Assyrians conquered Samaria and then took the survivors as captives to other lands. When Assyrian King Sennacherib threatened to seize Jerusalem, YHWH intervened. Without King Hezekiah having to resort to the use of bows, swords, horses, horsemen, and chariots, Jerusalem was saved. In one night, YHWH’s angel struck down 185,000 of the Assyrian host, forcing Sennacherib to abandon his plans to conquer Jerusalem. (2 Kings 19:32-36) In this way, the “sons of Judah” were saved without any military action on their part.

Commentary:

After having weaned Lo-ruhamah, Gomer again became pregnant. Unlike Jezreel (who is mentioned as having been borne to Hosea), this boy, like the girl Lo-ruhamah, is not so identified and, therefore, appears not to have been Hosea’s offspring.

Note: The extant Septuagint text does not transliterate the name “Lo-ammi” but provides the meaning of the name. Both the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint do not say how YHWH would not be to Israel. Based on the next verse, translators commonly add “God”—“I will not be your God.”

Commentary:

The name by which YHWH directed Hosea to call the boy, “Lo-ammi” (Not-My-People), revealed that he had rejected the people of the ten-tribe kingdom. On account of their idolatrous course, YHWH refused to recognize them as belonging to him. Their relationship to him had ceased to exist. To the people, YHWH was no longer their God.

Notes:

The Hebrew word that can be rendered “will be” may also be translated “was.” In the Septuagint, however, the first occurrence of the term is in the imperfect tense and the second time the word is in the future tense. It would appear that the future tense provides the best sense, as the reference is to a future development.

Many take the reference to “place” to mean the area of the ten-tribe kingdom and so regard the passage as signifying that in the very “place” where they were called “not my people,” there (in that location) they, in the future, would be called “sons of the living God.” This is the basis for the view that, during Christ’s 1,000-year reign, the Israelites would be occupying the same physical location and be acknowledged as “sons of the living God.”

It appears preferable, however, to regard “in place” or “in the place” as an idiomatic expression, meaning “in place of” or “instead of” — “and instead of being told, ‘You are Not-My-People,’ they shall be called Children-of-the-Living-God.” (Tanakh [JPS]) The passage itself primarily focuses on the changed relationship, not the location where this change would come about. Restoration of an approved relationship required those who were estranged to repentantly return to YHWH, with the location in which they found themselves being incidental.

The portion of Hosea 1:10 (2:1) quoted in Romans 9:26 is identical to the reading of the Septuagint.

Where the Masoretic Text introduces the part about being called “sons of the living God,” a partially preserved Dead Sea Scroll reads, “he will say,” not “it will be said.”

Commentary:

YHWH’s rejection of the people was not to cut them off permanently from the possibility of regaining a good relationship with him in the future. By implication, this also did not forever debar others who were not his people from becoming such. The time would come when the number of the “sons of Israel” would be beyond measuring and counting, like the “sand of the sea” (apparently the sand of the seashore or the sand of the beach bordering the sea), and be acknowledged by the living God as his “sons.”

In ceasing to be his people, the unfaithful Israelites came to have the same status as all the other nations. Therefore, a relationship with YHWH for persons not “his people” could come to include more than the rejected Israelites who could be reconciled by repentantly returning to him. This is the application of YHWH’s words, through Hosea, set forth in the apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans (9:24-26).

Harmonizing with the promise that Abraham’s seed would be “as numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore” and that those formerly not God’s people would be beyond measuring and counting, John saw, in vision, “a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.” (Genesis 22:17; Revelation 7:9, NRSV)

Commentary:

Although not directly stated previously, the rejection of the “sons of Israel” included being taken into exile, and the same development is implied for the “sons of Judah.” The time would come, however, when descendants of former residents in the territories of both kingdoms would cease to be divided. Unitedly, they would place themselves under one head or leader and “go up” from the land of their exile, evidently to return to their homeland. According to the historical record preserved in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the first group of returnees were under the leadership of Zerubbabel of the tribe of Judah.

Evidently the return from exile proved to be the beginning of the “great day of Jezreel,” as it marked the start of the fulfillment of the meaning of the name “God sows.” The once depopulated land again came to be filled with people. This was indeed a “great,” marvelous, or wonderful time. As YHWH made the return of the exiles possible, he was the One who populated the land, as if scattering or sowing seed.

Centuries later a greater “head” or leader from the line of David appeared on the earthly scene. Jesus, the promised Messiah and Son of God, proved to be the “head” under whom all who accept him form a united whole, one body. Throughout the centuries since then, many have accepted him as their head, and so there has indeed been a “sowing of seed.”