Hosea 2:8

Agricultural Fertility Withdrawn from Israel

2:8 Yet ¹  until now ²  she has refused to acknowledge ³  that I ⁴  was the one

who gave her the grain, the new wine, and the olive oil;

and that it was I who ⁵  lavished on her the silver and gold –

which they ⁶  used in worshiping Baal! ⁷ 

Hosea 13:2

13:2 Even now they persist in sin! ⁸ 

They make metal images for themselves,

idols that they skillfully fashion ⁹  from their own silver;

all of them are nothing but the work of craftsmen!

There is a saying about them: ¹⁰ 

“Those who sacrifice ¹¹  to the calf idol are calf kissers!” ¹² 

Hosea 13:1

Baal Worshipers and Calf Worshipers to be Destroyed

13:1 When Ephraim ¹³  spoke, ¹⁴  there was terror; ¹⁵ 

he was exalted ¹⁶  in Israel,

but he became guilty by worshiping Baal and died.

Hosea 12:1

12:1 Ephraim continually feeds on the wind;

he chases the east wind all day;

he multiplies lies and violence.

They make treaties ¹⁷  with Assyria,

and send olive oil as tribute ¹⁸  to Egypt.

Hosea 1:1

Superscription

1:1 ¹⁹ This is the word of the Lord which was revealed to Hosea ²⁰  son of Beeri during the time when ²¹  Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ruled Judah, ²²  and during the time when Jeroboam son of Joash ²³  ruled Israel. ²⁴ 

[2:8]  ¹ tn Or “For” (so KJV, NASB); or “But” (so NCV).

[2:8]  ² tn The phrase “until now” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity and smoothness.

[2:8]  ³ tn Heb “she does not know” (so NASB, NCV); or “she does not acknowledge.”

[2:8]  ⁴ tn The 1st person common singular independent personal pronoun אָנֹכִי (’anokhi, “I”) is emphatic, since the subject of this verbal clause is already explicit in the verb נָתַתִּי (natatti, Qal perfect 1st person common singular: “I gave”).

[2:8]  ⁵ tn The phrase “that it was I who” does not appear in the Hebrew text here, but is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.

[2:8]  ⁶ sn The third person plural here is an obvious reference to the Israelites who had been unfaithful to the Lord in spite of all that he had done for them. To maintain the imagery of Israel as the prostitute, a third person feminine singular would be called for; in the interest of literary consistency this has been supplied in some English translations (e.g., NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[2:8]  ⁷ tn Heb “for Baal” (so NAB, NIV, NRSV); cf. TEV “in the worship of Baal.”

[13:2]  ⁸ tn The phrase יוֹסִפוּ לַחֲטֹא (yosifu lakhato’, “they add to sin”) is an idiom meaning either (1) “they sin more and more” or (2) “they continue to sin” (see BDB 415 s.v. יָסַף 2.a; HALOT 418 s.v. יסף 3.b). The English versions are divided: (1) “they sin more and more” (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV) and (2) “they go on sinning” (NJPS), “they continue to sin” (NAB), “they (+ still TEV, NCV) keep on sinning” (NRSV, NLT).

[13:2]  ⁹ tn The term כִּתְבוּנָם (kitvunam, “according to their skill”; preposition כְּ + feminine singular noun תְּבוּנָה, tÿvunah + 3rd person masculine plural suffix) is an abbreviated form of כִּתְבוּנָתָם (kitvunatam; GKC 255-56 §91.e). תְּבוּנָה means “understanding, faculty, skill” (BDB 108 s.v. תְּבוּנָה 1). It refers to a builder skillfully constructing a house (Prov 24:3), God skillfully fashioning creation (Ps 136:5; Prov 3:19), and a craftsman skillfully making an idol (Hos 13:2).

[13:2]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “They say about them.” Another possible rendering for the line is: “It is said of them – those men who sacrifice, ‘They kiss calves!’” The phrase זֹבְחֵי אָדָם (zovkhe ’adam, “those men who sacrifice”) functions either (1) as the subject of the verb יִשָּׁקוּן (yishaqun, “they kiss”) in the quotation in the direct discourse: “It is said of them, ‘Those men who sacrifice kiss calves!’” or (2) in apposition to the indirect object 3rd person masculine plural suffix לָהֶם (lahem, “about them”): “It is said of them, that is, those men who sacrifice….”

[13:2]  ¹¹ tn Heb “Those among men who offer sacrifices.” The genitive construct זֹבְחֵי אָדָם (zovkhe ’adam, “the sacrificers of men”) is misunderstood by NIV as an objective genitive phrase: “they offer human sacrifice.” Such a classification is questionable: (1) Nowhere else in the book does Hosea accuse Israel of human sacrifice, and (2) archaeological evidence does not provide any evidence of human sacrifice in the Northern Kingdom during Iron Age I (1200-722 b.c.). This phrase should be classified as a genitive of species: the genitive represents the whole class or kind of a species (men) and the construct represents a part of the whole or subspecies within the whole (those who sacrifice): “those among men who offer sacrifice” (those who offer sacrifices). The expression “a fool of men” in Prov 15:20 provides a similar example: the genitive represents the whole class/species (men) and the construct represents a part of the whole/subspecies (a fool): “a foolish man.” This is the tactic adopted by most English versions: “the men that sacrifice” (KJV), “the men who sacrifice” (NASB), “they appoint men to sacrifice [to them]” (NJPS).

[13:2]  ¹² tn Heb “They kiss calves!” The verb יִשָּׁקוּן (yishaqun) may be parsed as an imperfect (“they kiss [calves]”) or jussive (“let them kiss [calves]!”). Paragogic nun endings (ן + יִשָּׁקוּ) are attached to imperfects to connote rhetorical emphasis. It is used either (1) to mark out an action that is contrary to normal practice and deviates from normal expectations (those who worship the calf idol are, in effect, kissing calves!), or (2) to express strong emotion (in this case disgust) at the action of the calf idolaters (they kiss calves!). For function of paragogic nun, see IBHS 516-17 §31.7.1.

[13:1]  ¹³ 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]  ¹⁴ 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]  ¹⁵ 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]  ¹⁶ 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.

[12:1]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “a treaty” (so NIV, NRSV); KJV, NASB “a covenant”; NAB “comes to terms.”

[12:1]  ¹⁸ tn The phrase “as tribute” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity. Cf. NCV “send a gift of olive oil.”

[1:1]  ¹⁹ tc The textual problems in Hosea are virtually unparalleled in the OT. The Masoretic Text (MT), represented by the Leningrad Codex (c. a.d. 1008), which served as the basis for both BHK and BHS, and the Aleppo Codex (c. a.d. 952), are textually corrupt by all accounts and have a multitude of scribal errors. Many medieval Masoretic mss preserve textual variants that differ from the Leningrad and Aleppo Codices. The Qumran materials (4QXII^c,d,g) contain numerous textual variants that differ from the MT; unfortunately, these texts are quite fragmentary (frequently in the very place that an important textual problem appears). The textual tradition and translation quality of the LXX and the early Greek recensions (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion) is mixed; in some places they are inferior to the MT but in other places they preserve a better reading. The textual apparatus of BHK and BHS contains many proposed emendations based on the ancient versions (Greek, Syriac, Latin, Aramaic) that often appear to be superior readings than what is preserved in the MT. In numerous cases, the MT readings are so difficult morphologically, syntactically, and contextually that conservative conjectural emendations are necessary to make sense of the text. Most major English versions (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NAB, NASB, NIV, TEV, NKJV, NJPS, NJB, NRSV, REB, NCV, CEV, NLT) adopt (either occasionally or frequently) textual variants reflected in the versions and occasionally adopt conservative conjectural emendations proposed in BHK and/or BHS. However, many of the textual problems in Hosea are so difficult that the English versions frequently are split among themselves. With this in mind, the present translation of Hosea must necessarily be viewed as only preliminary. Further work on the text and translation of Hosea is needed, not only in terms of the NET Bible but in Hosea studies in general. The text of Hosea should be better clarified when the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project completes work on the book of Hosea. For further study of textual problems in Hosea, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:228-71.

[1:1]  ²⁰ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which was to Hosea.” The words “This is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:1]  ²¹ tn Heb “in the days of” (again later in this verse). Cf. NASB “during the days of”; NIV “during the reigns of”; NLT “during the years when.”

[1:1]  ²² tn Heb “Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

[1:1]  ²³ sn Joash is a variation of the name Jehoash. Some English versions use “Jehoash” here (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

[1:1]  ²⁴ tn Heb “Jeroboam son of Joash, king of Israel.”