Hosea 2:14

Future Repentance and Restoration of Israel

2:14 However, in the future I will allure her; ¹ 

I will lead ²  her back into the wilderness,

and speak tenderly to her.

Hosea 10:4

10:4 They ³  utter empty words, ⁴ 

taking ⁵  false oaths and making empty ⁶  agreements.

Therefore legal disputes sprout up

like poisonous weeds ⁷  in the furrows of a plowed field.

Hosea 12:10

12:10 I spoke to the prophets;

I myself revealed many visions; ⁸ 

I spoke in parables ⁹  through ¹⁰  the prophets.”

Hosea 13:1

Baal Worshipers and Calf Worshipers to be Destroyed

13:1 When Ephraim ¹¹  spoke, ¹²  there was terror; ¹³ 

he was exalted ¹⁴  in Israel,

but he became guilty by worshiping Baal and died.

Hosea 7:13

Israel Has Turned Away from the Lord

7:13 Woe to them! For they have fled from me!

Destruction to them! For they have rebelled against me!

I want to deliver ¹⁵  them,

but they have lied to me.

Hosea 12:4

12:4 He struggled ¹⁶  with an angel and prevailed;

he wept and begged for his favor.

He found God ¹⁷  at Bethel, ¹⁸ 

and there he spoke with him! ¹⁹ 

Hosea 1:2

Symbols of Sin and Judgment: The Prostitute and Her Children

1:2 When the Lord first spoke ²⁰  through ²¹  Hosea, he ²²  said to him, ²³  “Go marry ²⁴  a prostitute ²⁵  who will bear illegitimate children conceived through prostitution, ²⁶  because the nation ²⁷  continually commits spiritual prostitution ²⁸  by turning away from ²⁹  the Lord.”

[2:14]  ¹ tn The participle מְפַתֶּיהָ (méfatteha, Piel participle masculine singular + 3rd feminine singular suffix from פָּתָה, patah, “to allure”) following the deictic particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “Now!”) describes an event that will occur in the immediate or near future.

[2:14]  ² tn Following the future-time referent participle (מְפַתֶּיהָ, méfatteha) there is a string of perfects introduced by vav consecutive that refer to future events.

[10:4]  ³ tc The referent of the 3rd person common plural verb דִּבְּרוּ (dibbÿru, “they speak”) is the masculine singular noun וְהַמֶּלֶךְ (vÿhammelekh, “a king” in v. 3) which is used generically, representing all human kings of Israel to which the 3rd common plural verb refers. Although this is a bit syntactically awkward, it is not necessary to emend the MT to the 3rd masculine singular verb form דָּבַר (davar, “he speaks”) as the BHS editors suggest. The LXX, however, reads the singular form λαλῶν (lalwn, “uttering”).

[10:4]  ⁴ tn Heb “they speak words.” The cognate accusative construction דִּבְּרוּ דְבָרִים (dibbÿru dÿvarim; literally, “they speak words”) is an idiom that means “they speak mere words” (so NASB; NRSV similar) or “they utter empty words” (so TEV), that is, they make empty promises (e.g., Isa 58:13; BDB 180-181 s.v. דָּבַר 2). The immediately following collocated phrase אָלוֹת שָׁוְא (’alot shavÿ’, “swearing an empty oath”) confirms this nuance. The LXX understood this idiom in the same way: λαλῶν ῥήματα προφάσειας ψευδεῖς (lalwn r{hmata profaseias yeudeis, “speaking false professions as his words”).

[10:4]  ⁵ tn The two infinitive absolutes אָלוֹת (’alot, Qal infinitive absolute from II אָלָה, ’alah, “to swear an oath”; BDB 46 s.v. II אָלָה) and כָּרֹת (karot, Qal infinitive absolute from כָּרַת, karat, “to make [a covenant]”; BDB 503 s.v. כָּרַת 4), which appear without conjunctions, continue the description of the action of the preceding finite verb דִּבְּרוּ (dibbÿru, Piel perfect 3rd person common plural from דָּבַר, davar, “to speak”). Although the infinitives continue the description of the action of the finite verb, they call special attention to the action of the infinitive rather than the action of the finite verb. See IBHS 595 §35.5.2b.

[10:4]  ⁶ tn The word “empty” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied. It is supplied in the translation for clarity. Cf. TEV “useless treaties.”

[10:4]  ⁷ tn The noun II רֹאשׁ (ro’sh) refers to a “poisonous plant” (Deut 29:17; Hos 10:4) or “bitter herb” (Ps 69:22; Lam 3:5; BDB 912 s.v. רֹאשׁ 1; HALOT 1167 s.v. רֹאשׁ 1).

[12:10]  ⁵ tn Heb “I myself multiplied vision[s]”; cf. NASB “I gave numerous visions.”

[12:10]  ⁶ tn There is debate whether אֲדַמֶּה (’adammeh, Piel imperfect 1st person common singular) is derived from I דָמָה (damah, “similitude, parable”) or II דָמָה (“oracle of doom”). The lexicons favor the former (BDB 198 s.v. I דָּמָה 1; HALOT 225-26 s.v. I דמה). Most translators favor “parables” (cf. KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS), but a few opt for “oracles of doom” (cf. NRSV, TEV, CEV).

[12:10]  ⁷ tn Heb “by the hand of”; KJV, ASV “by the ministry of.”

[13:1]  ⁷ sn In Hosea the name “Ephraim” does not refer to the tribe, but to the region of Mount Ephraim where the royal residence of Samaria was located. It functions as a synecdoche of location (Mount Ephraim) for its inhabitants (the king of Samaria; e.g., 5:13; 8:8, 10).

[13:1]  ⁸ tn The rulers of Ephraim (i.e., Samaria) issued many political decisions in the 8th century b.c. which brought “terror” to the other regions of the Northern Kingdom, as well as to Judah: “hearts shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind” (Isa 7:2; 2 Kgs 16:5).

[13:1]  ⁹ tn The noun רְתֵת (rÿtet, “terror, trembling”) appears only here in OT (BDB 958 s.v. רְתֵת; HALOT 1300-1301 s.v. רְתֵת). However, it is attested in 1QH 4:33 where it means “trembling” and is used as a synonym with רַעַד (ra’ad, “quaking”). It also appears in Mishnaic Hebrew, meaning “trembling” (G. Dalman, Aramäisch-neuhebräisches Handwörterbuch, 406, s.v. רעד). This is the meaning reflected in the Greek recensions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, as well as Jerome’s Latin Vulgate.

[13:1]  ¹⁰ tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal text as נָשָׂא (nasa’, “he exalted”; Qal perfect 3rd person masculine singular) which is syntactically awkward. The LXX and Syriac reflect a vocalization tradition of נִשָּׂא (nisa’, “he was exalted”; Niphal perfect 3rd person masculine singular). The BHS editors suggest that this revocalization should be adopted, and it has been followed by NAB, NIV, NRSV.

[7:13]  ⁹ tn Heb “redeem” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); NCV, TEV “save”; CEV “I would have rescued them.”

[12:4]  ¹¹ tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal text וָיָּשַׂר (vayyasar, vav consecutive + Qal preterite 3rd person masculine singular from שׂוּר, sur, “to see”); however, parallelism with שָׂרַה (sarah, “he contended”) in 12:3 suggested that it be vocalized as ויּשׂר (vav consecutive + Qal preterite 3rd person masculine singular from שׂרה [“to strive, contend”]). The latter is followed by almost all English versions here.

[12:4]  ¹² tn Heb “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[12:4]  ¹³ map For location see Map4 G4; Map5 C1; Map6 E3; Map7 D1; Map8 G3.

[12:4]  ¹⁴ tc The Leningrad Codex and the Allepo Codex both read 1st person common plural עִמָּנוּ (’immanu, “with us”). The LXX and Peshitta both reflect an alternate Hebrew Vorlage of 3rd person masculine singular עִמוֹ (’imo, “with him”). The BHS editors suggest emending the MT in favor of the Greek and Syriac. The internal evidence of 12:4-5 favors the 3rd person masculine singular reading. It is likely that the 1st person common plural ־נוּ reading on עִמָּנוּ arose due to a misunderstanding of the 3rd person masculine singular ־נוּ suffix on יִמְצָאֶנּוּ (yimtsa’ennu, “he found him”; Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) which was probably misunderstood as the 1st person common plural suffix: “he found us.” Several English versions follow the LXX and Syriac: “there he spoke with him” (RSV, NAB, NEB, NIV, NJPS, TEV). Others follow the MT: “there he spoke with us” (KJV, NASB, CEV). The Hebrew University Old Testament Project, which tends to preserve the MT whenever possible, adopts the MT reading but gives it only a “C” rating. See D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:262-63.

[1:2]  ¹³ tn The construct noun תְּחִלַּת (tékhillat, “beginning of”) displays a wider use of the construct state here, preceding a perfect verb דִּבֶּר (dibber, “he spoke”; Piel perfect 3rd person masculine singular) rather than a genitive noun. This is an unusual temporal construction (GKC 422 §130.d). It may be rendered, “When he (= the Lord) began to speak” (cf. ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, and most other modern English versions, all of which are similar). This time-determinative was not correctly understood by the LXX or by the KJV: “The beginning of the word of the Lord.”

[1:2]  ¹⁴ tn The preposition בְּ (bet) on בְּהוֹשֵׁעַ (bÿhoshea’) is an instrumental use of the preposition (BDB 89 s.v. בְּ III.2.b): “by, with, through Hosea” rather than a directional “to Hosea.” This focuses on the entire prophetic revelation through Hosea to Israel.

[1:2]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “the Lord.” This is redundant in English, so the pronoun has been used in the translation (cf. TEV, NLT).

[1:2]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “to Hosea.” The proper name is replaced by the pronoun here to avoid redundancy in English (cf. NIV, NCV, NLT).

[1:2]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “Go, take for yourself” (so NRSV; NASB, NIV “to yourself”). In conjunction with the following phrase this means “marry.”

[1:2]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “a wife of harlotries.” The noun זְנוּנִים (zÿnunim) means “prostitute; harlot” (HALOT 275-76 s.v. זְנוּנִים). The term does not refer to mere adultery (cf. NIV; also NCV, TEV, CEV “unfaithful”) which is expressed by the root נַאַף (na’af, “adultery”; HALOT 658 s.v. נאף). The plural noun זְנוּנִים (zénunim, literally, “harlotries”) is an example of the plural of character or plural of repeated behavior. The phrase “wife of harlotries” (אֵשֶׁת זְנוּנִים, ’eshet zénunim) probably refers to a prostitute, possibly a temple prostitute serving at a Baal temple.

[1:2]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “and children of harlotries.” However, TEV takes the phrase to mean the children will behave like their mother (“your children will be just like her”).

[1:2]  ²⁰ tn Heb “the land.” The term “the land” is frequently used as a synecdoche of container (the land of Israel) for the contained (the people of Israel).

[1:2]  ²¹ tn Heb “prostitution.” The adjective “spiritual” is supplied in the translation to clarify that apostasy is meant here. The construction זָנֹה תִזְנֶה (zanoh tizneh, infinitive absolute + imperfect of the same root) repeats the root זָנַה (zanah, “harlotry”) for rhetorical emphasis. Israel was guilty of gross spiritual prostitution by apostatizing from Yahweh. The verb זָנַה is used in a concrete sense to refer to a spouse being unfaithful in a marriage relationship (HALOT 275 s.v. זנה 1), and figuratively meaning “to be unfaithful” in a relationship with God by prostituting oneself with other gods and worshiping idols (Exod 34:15; Lev 17:7; 20:5, 6; Deut 31:16; Judg 8:27, 33; 21:17; 1 Chr 5:25; Ezek 6:9; 20:30; 23:30; Hos 4:15; Ps 106:39; see HALOT 275 s.v. 2).

[1:2]  ²² tn Heb “from after.”