Hosea 4:4

The Lord’s Dispute against the Sinful Priesthood

4:4 Do not let anyone accuse or contend against anyone else: ¹ 

for my case is against you priests! ² 

Hosea 2:10

2:10 Soon ³  I will expose her lewd nakedness ⁴  in front of her lovers,

and no one will be able to rescue her from me! ⁵ 

Hosea 6:9

6:9 The company of priests is like a gang of robbers,

lying in ambush to pounce on a victim.

They commit murder on the road to Shechem;

they have done heinous crimes!

Hosea 2:2

Idolatrous Israel Will Be Punished Like a Prostitute

2:2 Plead earnestly ⁶  with your ⁷  mother

(for ⁸  she is not my wife, and I am not her husband),

so that ⁹  she might put an end to her adulterous lifestyle, ¹⁰ 

and turn away from her sexually immoral behavior. ¹¹ 

Hosea 2:16

2:16 “At that time,” ¹²  declares the Lord,

“you will call, ¹³  ‘My husband’; ¹⁴ 

you will never again call me, ¹⁵  ‘My master.’ ¹⁶ 

Hosea 3:3

3:3 Then I told her, “You must live with me many days; you must not commit adultery or have sexual intercourse with ¹⁷  another man, and I also will wait for you.”

Hosea 9:7

9:7 The time of judgment ¹⁸  is about to arrive! ¹⁹ 

The time of retribution ²⁰  is imminent! ²¹ 

Let Israel know! ²² 

Israel Rejects Hosea’s Prophetic Exhortations

The prophet is considered a fool ²³  –

the inspired man ²⁴  is viewed as a madman ²⁵  –

because of the multitude of your sins

and your intense ²⁶  animosity.

Hosea 2:7

2:7 Then she will pursue her lovers, but she will not catch ²⁷  them;

she will seek them, but she will not find them. ²⁸ 

Then she will say,

“I will go back ²⁹  to my husband, ³⁰ 

because I was better off then than I am now.” ³¹ 

[4:4]  ¹ tn Or “Let no one contend or accuse.”

[4:4]  ² tc The MT reads וְעַמְּךָ כִּמְרִיבֵי כֹהֵן (vÿ’ammÿkha kimrive khohen): “And your people [are] like those who contend against the priest.” This is reflected in the LXX and the versions; however, it is syntactically awkward and makes little sense in context. Several textual critics suggest emending the text to read וְעִמְּךָ רִיבִי כֹהֵן (vÿ’immÿkha rivi khohen): “My contention is with/against you, O priest!” This involves (1) the revocalization of עַמְּךָ (“your people”) to עִמְּךָ (“with/against you”) and (2) positing dittography (a letter written twice instead of once) of כְּ (kaf) between original וְעַמְּךָ רִיבִי to create וְעַמְּךָ כִּרִיבִי (MT). The BHS editors suggest that the MT is corrupt and should be emended. However, the editors of the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project retain the MT reading with a “B” rating. Likewise, the English translations are split: (1) KJV “for thy people are as they that strive with the priest”; NASB “for your people are like those who contend with the priest”; NIV “for your people are like those who bring charges against a priest”; (2) RSV “for with you is my contention, O priest”; NJPS “for this your people has a grievance against [you], O priest!”; TEV “my complaint is against you priests”; CEV “My case is against you, the priests!”

[2:10]  ³ tn The particle עַתָּה (’attah) often refers to the imminent or the impending future: “very soon” (BDB 774 s.v. עַתָּה 1.b). In Hosea it normally introduces imminent judgment (Hos 2:12; 4:16; 5:7; 8:8, 13; 10:2).

[2:10]  ⁴ tn Heb “her lewdness” (so KJV, NIV); NAB, NRSV “her shame.”

[2:10]  ⁵ tn Heb “out of my hand” (so NAB, NASB, NRSV); TEV “save her from my power.”

[2:2]  ⁵ tn Heb “Plead with your mother, plead!” The imperative רִיבוּ (rivu, “plead!”) is repeated twice in this line for emphasis. This rhetorical expression is handled in a woodenly literal sense by most English translations: NASB “Contend…contend”; NAB “Protest…protest!”; NIV “Rebuke…rebuke”; NRSV “Plead…plead”; CEV “Accuse! Accuse your mother!”

[2:2]  ⁶ sn The suffix on the noun אִמְּכֶם (’immékhem, “your mother”) is a plural form (2nd person masculine). The children of Gomer represent the “children” (i.e., people) of Israel; Gomer represents the nation as a whole.

[2:2]  ⁷ tn The particle כִּי (ki) introduces a parenthetical explanatory clause (however, cf. NCV “because”).

[2:2]  ⁸ tn The dependent volitive sequence of imperative followed by vav + jussive (רִיבוּ, rivu followed by וְתָסֵר, vétaser) creates a purpose clause: “so that she might turn away from” (= “put an end to”); cf. NRSV “that she put away”; KJV “let her therefore put away.” Many English translations begin a new sentence here, presumably to improve the English style (so NAB, NIV, TEV, NLT), but this obscures the connection with the preceding clause.

[2:2]  ⁹ tn Heb “put away her adulteries from her face.” The plural noun זְנוּנֶיהָ (zénuneha, “adulteries”) is an example of the plural of repeated (or habitual) action: she has had multiple adulterous affairs.

[2:2]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “[put away] her immoral behavior from between her breasts.” Cf. KJV “her adulteries”; NIV “the unfaithfulness.”

[2:16]  ⁷ tn Heb “And in that day”; NLT “In that coming day.”

[2:16]  ⁸ tc The MT reads תִּקְרְאִי (tiqrÿ’i, “you will call”; Qal imperfect 2nd person feminine singular). The versions (LXX, Syriac, Vulgate) all reflect an alternate Vorlage of תִּקְרָא לִי (tiqra’ li, “she will call me”; Qal imperfect 3rd person feminine singular followed by preposition לְ, lamed, + 1st person common singular pronominal suffix). This textual variant undoubtedly arose under the influence of לִי תִּקְרְאִי (tiqrÿ’i li) which follows. Most English versions follow the reading of the MT (KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT, CEV), but some follow the ancient versions and read the 3rd person (“she”, so NAB, NCV, TEV).

[2:16]  ⁹ tn There are wordplays on the terms אִישׁ (’ish) and בַּעַל (ba’al) here. The term אִישִׁי (’ishi, “my man, husband”) is a title of affection (Gen 2:23; 3:6, 16) as the counterpart to אִשָּׁה (’ishah, “woman, wife”). The term בַּעְלִי (ba’li, “my lord”) emphasizes the husband’s legal position (Exod 21:3; Deut 22:22; 24:4). The relationship will no longer be conditioned on the outward legal commitment but on a new inward bond of mutual affection and love.

[2:16]  ¹⁰ tc The MT reads תִקְרְאִי לִי (tiqrÿ’i li, “you will call me”; Qal imperfect 2nd person feminine singular followed by preposition לְ, lamed, + 1st person common singular pronominal suffix). The versions (LXX, Syriac, Vulgate) all reflect an alternate Vorlage of תִקְרְא לִי (tiqrÿ’ li, “she will call me”; Qal imperfect 3rd person feminine singular followed by preposition לְ + 1st person common singular pronominal suffix). This textual variant is related to the preceding textual issue (see preceding tc note).

[2:16]  ¹¹ sn There is a wordplay on the terms בַּעְלִי (ba’li, “my master”) and הַבְּעָלִים (habbé’alim, “the Baals”) which are derived from the root בַּעַל (ba’al, “master; lord”). This wordplay is especially effective because the term בַּעַל can refer to one’s husband and is also the name of the Canaanite storm god Baal. Referring to a spouse the term normally means “husband; master.” It was a common, ordinary, nonpejorative term that was frequently used in an interchangeable manner with אִישׁ (’ish, “husband; man”). Due to its similarity in sound to the abhorrent Canaanite fertility god Baal, the repentant Israelites would be so spiritually sensitive that they would refrain from even uttering this neutral term for fear of recalling their former idolatry. The purpose of the exile is to end Israel’s worship of Baal and to remove syncretism.

[3:3]  ⁹ tn Heb “and you will not be for”; NIV “be intimate with.”

[9:7]  ¹¹ tn Heb “the days of the visitation”; NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV “the days of punishment.”

[9:7]  ¹² tn Heb “has come” (בָּאוּ, ba’u). The two perfect tense (suffix-conjugation) verbs בָּאוּ (Qal perfect 3rd person common plural from בּוֹא, bo’, “to come”) repeated in this verse are both examples of the so-called “prophetic perfect”: the perfect, which connotes completed or factual action, is used in reference to future events to emphasize the certainty of the announced event taking place.

[9:7]  ¹³ tn Heb “the days of the retribution”; NIV “of reckoning”; NRSV “of recompense.”

[9:7]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “has come”; NIV “are at hand”; NLT “is almost here.”

[9:7]  ¹⁵ tc The Aleppo Codex and Leningrad Codex (the MT ms employed for BHS) both place the atnach (colon-divider) after יֵדְעוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל (yedÿ’u yisra’el, “Let Israel know!”), indicating that this line belongs with 9:7a (cf. NAB, NASB, NIV). However, the LXX reads κακωθήσεται (kakwqhsetai) which reflects an underlying Vorlage of יָרֵעוּ (yare’u, Qal imperfect 3rd person common plural from יָרַע, yara’, “to cry”), as opposed to the MT יֵדְעוּ (yedÿ’u, Qal jussive 3rd common plural from יָדַע, yada’, “to know”). The Old Greek connects יֵדְעוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל (“Israel cries out”) with the following lines (cf. NRSV), which appear to be quotations of Israel mocking Hosea. Aquila (ἔγνω, egnw) and Symmachus (γνώσεται, gnwsetai) both reflect the proto-MT tradition. For a discussion of this textual and syntactical problem, see H. W. Wolff, Hosea (Hermeneia), 150.

[9:7]  ¹⁶ tn Or “is distraught”; cf. CEV, NLT “are crazy.”

[9:7]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “the man of the Spirit”; NAB, NRSV “spirit.”

[9:7]  ¹⁸ tn Or “is driven to despair.” The term מְשֻׁגָּע (mÿshugga’, Pual participle masculine singular from שָׁגַע, shaga’, “to be mad”) may be understood in two senses: (1) It could be a predicate adjective which is a figure of speech: “to be maddened,” to be driven to despair (Deut 28:34); or (2) it could be a substantive: “a madman,” referring to prophets who attempted to enter into a prophetic state through whipping themselves into a frenzy (1 Sam 21:16; 2 Kgs 9:11; Jer 29:26; see BDB 993 s.v. שָׁגַע). The prophetic context of 9:7 favors the latter option (which is followed by most English versions). Apparently, the general populace viewed these mantics with suspicion and questioned the legitimacy of their claim to be true prophets (e.g., 2 Kgs 9:11; Jer 29:26).

[9:7]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “great.”

[2:7]  ¹³ tn Heb “overtake” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); NLT “be able to catch up with.”

[2:7]  ¹⁴ tn In the Hebrew text the accusative direct object pronoun אֹתָם (’otam, “them”) is omitted/elided for balanced poetic parallelism. The LXX supplies αὐτους (autous, “them”); but it is not necessary to emend the MT because this is a poetic literary convention rather than a textual problem.

[2:7]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “I will go and return” (so NRSV). The two verbs joined with vav form a verbal hendiadys. Normally, the first verb functions adverbially and the second retains its full verbal sense (GKC 386-87 §120.d, h). The Hebrew phrase אֵלְכָה וְאָשׁוּבָה (’elkhah vÿ’ashuvah, “I will go and I will return”) connotes, “I will return again.” As cohortatives, both verbs emphasize the resolution of the speaker.

[2:7]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “to my man, the first.” Many English translations (e.g., KJV, NAB, NRSV, TEV) take this as “my first husband,” although this implies that there was more than one husband involved. The text refers to multiple lovers, but these were not necessarily husbands.

[2:7]  ¹⁷ tn Or “because it was better for me then than now” (cf. NCV).