Devotional Commentary on Hosea 4
Hosea speaks God's Word. The remnant
of [spiritual] Israel should listen that the Lord has a case with the
inhabitants of the earth. "Hear a word of the Lord, sons of Israel, for a
case is there unto the Lord with the
inhabitants of the earth. For there is no truth, and no kindness, and no
knowledge of God on the earth" (verse 1). In the Targum the paraphrase
explains this judgment of God with the inhabitants of the earth: "Receive
the word of the Lord, children of Israel, for the judgment is before the Lord
with the inhabitants of the earth: for there are not those who do the truth,
and there are not those who speak the kindness, and there are not those that
walk in the fear of the Lord on the earth". The translation that comes the closest
to the original Hebrew is the YLT. The NASB is also very close in this verse.
Here in the original the "sons" bny are used but the KJV made it
"children". So did also the Darby. The RSV made it the "people"
of Israel. This is a very interpretative deviation from the original since the
word for "people" are used in the original in verses 4, 5 and 6 as
`am. Israel must listen to the word of the
Lord but the case is with the inhabitants of the earth. Some translations want
to translate it as the "land" as if it is only Palestine that is
under consideration here but verse 3 will show that it is a global dimension
that is in mind here and not a convined space. The sea is already a boundary
that is undefined, that means there is not an end although there is a
beginning. John Calvin also translated it as the "inhabitants of the
land". The way he understood it is that this dispute was with the people
of Israel. This is a case that the Lord has
against the inhabitants of the earth meaning that there is a time when He will
investigate in a judgment. The investigative judgment means that the Lord is
looking at people and taking index of the stock to see if there is any good on
the earth. The next question is when this investigative judgment will be or
was? Is this an ongoing daily activity that God is always investigating every
moment of every day? In this verse alone the time element cannot be answered
fully. God looked at the earth during this investigative judgment and He could
not find truth and no kindness and also no knowledge of God. We are
interpreting that judgment as an investigative judgment while John Calvin
understood it to be an executive judgment. John Calvin was a preteristic
interpreter who attempted to explain the text at times as only applicable to
the near days of Hosea's future and at the same time a presentist who attempted
to operate with an textual equavalence that tries to hook the text with
situations in his own day. The time of Hosea was before Confucius, Buddha,
Mohammed and if this verse is applicable in that time it means that there is no
truth upon the earth. There was a long history of Assyrian, Babylonian,
Aramaean, Ionic, new-Hittite, and Egyptian systems of religious thinking but if
this verse is applicable during Hosea's day, then none of these religions could
satisfy the Lord with their concepts of "truth". It is impossible
according to this verse to argue that God is open to any kind of religious
system as long as they just vaguely acknowledge the existence of a God or gods
for that matter. This kind of pluralism that is suggested sometimes runs
against the reading of this verse. All roads lead to Rome but not all roads
lead to God. In the parable of Jesus there is a narrow and wide road. All these
systems since the earliest man are dealing with the same content: a dualism
between good and bad that exists; degeneration of the earth, its inhabitants
and bio-sphere; methods to overcome the evil and attaining the good; death and
how to overcome that; structures of salvation and atonement; focusing on
ontological, existential and teleological issues of human existence. However,
none of these structures could satisfy God as containing truth. We are not told
whether God is expecting all these qualities in a person or only one of them at
least? That is to say, can a person who does not have the truth but who is kind
satisfy God? Can a person with no knowledge of God but very kind satisfy the
demands of God? This verse does not indicate whether all these characteristics
should be in a person to qualify. In Romans 2:14-16 the future judgment of
those who do not have the truth is described. If they do the things of the law
they are unto themselves a law even though they do not have the law. Calvin made a valuable contribution in
this section by indicating that "we must bear in mind that the Prophets
did not literally write what they delivered to the people, nor did they treat
only once of those things which are now extant with us; but we in their books
collected summaries and heads of those matters which they were wont to address
to the people. Hosea, no doubt, very often descanted on the exile and the
restoration of the people, forasmuch as he dwelt much on all the things which
we have hitherto noticed. Indeed, the slowness and dullness of the people were
such, that the same things were repeated daily. But, it was enough of the
Prophets to make and to write down a brief summary of what they taught in their
discourses" (http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/ipb-e/epl-04/cvhos-09.txt).
It was A. Weiser who said that the individual sayings in this chapter was
collected together by association and he added that this is proof that Hosea
did not write it (A. Weiser, page 236). It would have saved Thomas Paine some
time if he had first read the commentaries of Calvin carefully on the
methodology of writing by the prophets. He would have had answers to his
presumed eloquent questions in the Age of Reason Part I and Part II of 1795. God complained about the spirituality
of the inhabitants of the earth that they are "Cursing, and lying and
murder, and stealing and adultery. They break and blood touched upon
blood" (verse 2). There never was in the history of
mankind a period that could be considered more evil than another. All these
evils were there since the earliest man. What we do have here is a God who's
patience ran out. If He take stock or index during an investigative judgment
but do not find some who are righteous He reacts with punishment. In Genesis 6
there was an investigative judgment and the Lord only found Noah righteous. In
the year 2523 BCE the flood destroyed all the dinosaurs and also mankind except
the ones who were saved by the ark. We have to look at the kind of punishment
that is described in the next verse to get a clue as to the dating of this
investigative judgment. Describing the status of those alive
at the Second Coming of Christ taking the spiritual remnant alive and
resurrected to heaven away from this earth, those on this earth shall waste
away: "Therefore the earth will mourn and all who live in it shall waste
away, with the beast of the field and with the birds of the heavens and also
the fishes of the sea shall be taken away" (verse 3). Starting off with the tense whether
present tense, past tense or future tense, the RSV, NASB and the YLT translated
it as the present tense but the Darby and KJV translated it as the future
tense. The original is using the future tenses in this verse and the RSV and
NASB cannot be followed here for that aspect. It becomes a crucial ingredient
in the interpretation of the verse so that readers need to know this. The RSV
and NASB translated it as the "fish" and not "fishes" but
that could be because the translators thought that the word "fish"
does not have a plural in English although the original reads a plural. The
best rendering is probably the KJV and the Darby. The RSV, NASB and YLT ignores
the very important tense aspect of the future that is part of prophetic speech
and which is definitly in the original. See for instance the majority of Greek
manuscripts since 400 CE and deep into the Middle Ages until the Reformation
that also reads the future tense. The readings of the present tense for the
future in the original by the translators of the RSV and NASB are done so on the
basis of the fact that they are preterists who do not believe that the prophet
can foretell but only that he can forthtell. The prophet cannot look forward,
only backward or in his own present. That is why they want to use the present
tense. Readers should be aware of this dillemma in translation. For tense
problems in the prophets especially the case of past/future for the original
future tense, see the conflict in the translation of Joel by Jerome using the
future tense whereas Jeromes commentary on Joel is sometimes using the past
tense (H. Wolff, Dodekapropheten 2 Bk. XIV/2 [Vlyun: 1969], 67-70). The reader
cannot make the original saying what it does not say. Then it becomes eisegesis
not exegesis. It means you are putting into God's word, words that was not
meant to come from God. John Calvin translated this verse in
the future tense as well and so did John Wesley. Only in the Flood in the year 2692 BCE
did this happen to all the inhabitants of the earth. In the days of Hosea and
after, such an event did not occur. It leads us to the understanding that we
are dealing here with an eschatological unit where this event will occur at the
end of time. The time when the earth will mourn is that day when the battle of
the valley of Jehosaphat described in Joel and in Psalm 46 will take place. In
that battle the righteous will be safely in Zion or the New Jerusalem and God
the warrior will go out to face the enemy who is the rest of the inhabitants of
the earth. It is at that time that this will happen and the result according to
the book of Revelation 20 is that the earth shall be void and Satan will be
bound for a millennium in a situation of loneliness. The mourning of the earth is directly
a result of the punishment due to the investigative judgment. If this investigative
judgment is to occur at the end of time as we are suggesting here then the
truth systems of Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Buddha, Mohammed and others are
not impressive for God. John Calvin thought that the prophet is here enlarging
on the greatness of God's wrath (preteristically viewed by himself as the exile
and its results) and that is why the fishes and animals are also mentioned. It
is interesting that Calvin kept open the possibility of a second alternative
interpretation (last judgment in future) to this verse by saying: "unless
the Prophet, it may be, means, that though God should for a time suspend that
last judgment, yet the Israelites would gain nothing, seeing that they would,
by continual languar, pine away." John Wesley felt that this judgment was
the "wasting armies" and that the domestic animals were killed by the
armies and that the smell made the birds left the country? (http://wesley.nnc.edu/wesley/notes/hosea.htm#chapter+IV).
This is a bit too farfetched to be true. No matter how far interpreters are
trying to stretch the meanings in a preteristic setting, we have to admit that
it does not fit into history but belongs to the eschaton. Sometimes churchboards blames a pastor
and gossip around among the deacons and elders about his ministry but Hosea
said: "Yet, let no man judge, and do not accuse someone, and your people
are like those who judges a priest". It is an abomination to the Lord to
judge or speak ill of His annointed. Whereas verses 1-3 is dealing with the
eschaton when God will judge the world, this verse returns in content to the
days of Hosea and ask them not to judge anyone or accuse anybody. The simple
truth is that no one should take a position of judgment over another since God
is ultimately going to be the judge. The kind of judgment that is in mind here
is not the earthly prerogatives of mankind in a legal judicial system but
dealing with the ultimates of existence. In the end time it is God who will
collect the harvest from the weed. It is His task not that of any human. When a
man of God stumbles and fall the judgment from the man in the street is more
severe than it would be to another fellow human being. It is like a judge who
is caught in corruption. The masses are ruthless since they think that he should
have known better. If the people in Hosea's day are like those who judges a
priest then it means that their judgment and accusations are in the extreme.
John Wesley interpreted it as to mean that there was no modesty or fear of God
or man left among them, "they will contend with their teachers, reprovers,
and counsellors". Similar is the reading of Calvin who felt that the
prophet did not single out an individual priest here but that his attack was
against the perverseness of the people in that they would not be willing to
listen to reproofs. I do not think that the point is here that the people are
unwilling to listen to a "priest's reproofs". It is rather that there
is now a comparison between the judgment of God on the one hand and judgment of
people amongst themselves as well as of priests, on the other. Hosea explained the situation in verse
5 as follows: "And you stumble the day, and also the prophet stumble with
you the night. And I destroy your
mother". Surprisingly the RSV and NASB now shifted gears and translated
the past tense of the original as future. The KJV also translated in 1611 it as
the future. The Darby also used the future tense here for the past forms of the
verb in the original. The YLT is the closest to the original by translating this
form in the past. It is also possible to translate it as the present tense
since the forms for past and present are the same in the Hebrew. The Septuagint
used the future tense for the first two verbs and maybe these translations were
led by the Greek translation here. The fact that the Septuagint read it as such
does not make it right per se. John Calvin also translated it as if it is the
future. However, that future for Calvin is seen as something that would happen
"shortly" as he put it in his commentary. Someone is stumbling during the day
and night. In the night time the prophet is also stumbling with this person.
Who this mother is that will be destroyed is not clear. For Calvin of course
with his presentistic interpretation method on the basis of textual
equavalence, "mother" is seen as the Church. John Wesley had an
all-inclusive meaning of "mother": "both the state, or kingdom;
and the synagogues, or churches: the publick is as a mother to private
persons". Wesley also employed a presentistic method of textual
equavalence in his interpretation. Another way to look at it is to suggest a
personification of the day and night and that the mother of the day and night
is the sun. The sun will be destroyed by God in the eschaton. Calvin
interpreted this section that the expression "day and night" attempts
to show the totality of the time and the totality of the success of the
destruction. It is for him as if the prophet wants to indicate that all from
the first to the last will suffer punishment and no one will escape. The
prophets in this section is not the true faithful ministers of His word but the
imposters as Calvin called them. John Wesley read "this day" and
Calvin mentioned that possibility but did not follow that. Jerome in his Latin
Vulgate also used the future tenses to translate the verbs and so did the
Greek. The Targum kept to the present tense. The Syriac is translating with a
future. The Coptic is reading a future. The reason why people in this world
are destroyed is because of a lack of divine revelation (verse 6). Tragic it is
for a Remnant of God to be destroyed because of a lack of knowledge of God.
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you, you have
rejected the knowledge, I also reject you from being a priest to Me, and you
have forgotten the law of your God. I will forget your sons, also I" verse
6. The lack of knowledge that is in mind
here is the knowledge of God. A person with the knowledge of God is likely to
be selected by Him to be His priest. Such a person will not forget the law of
God. To reject knowledge of God and to forget His law are two things that is
not acceptable for God in the priesthood of man. Calvin said that this
"law was fit to guide them". He said that "it was then as though
God himself did shine forth from heaven, when he gave them his law." It is
clear that the law that Calvin had correctly in mind here is the Ten
Commandments. About the style of writing of Hosea, Calvin commented: "this Prophet is in his sentences
often concise, and so his transitions are various and obscure: now he speaks in
his own person, then he assumes the person of God; now he turns his discourse
to the people, then he speaks in the third person; now he reproves the priests,
then immediately he addresses the whole people." This aspect is unfortunately
overlooked by men like Thomas Paine in his book: The Age of Reason, Parts I and
II. It is also overlooked by men who operate with the methods of historical
criticism of whatever kind, since they attempt to dissect the text when any
fluctuation in style, words or grammar occurs. I once heard Hermann-Joseph
Stipp lecturing on the prayer of Jonah and when he came to chapter 2:4-10 he
noted fluctuation between first and third persons. He immediately assumed that
different authors had glossed in the accounts here. He was joking about the
method of scissors and wastebasket when it comes to the text, namely that the
scholar sometimes have to cut out some pieces and refit them and even cast some
away in the wastebasket. After the lecture I asked him to consult the Annals of
Shalmaneser III's campaigns on the Black Obelisk where the narration is in the
first person until the thirty-first year. At this point the narration shifted
to the third person but suddenly reverted back to the first person just to have
a continuous fluctuation of persons until the end of the account (A. Kirk
Grayson, "Assyria and Babylonia" Or 49/2 [1980]: 140-144, pp.
165-167). I wanted him to explain to me how scissors can cut a stone? He was
honest enough that day to admit that the historical critical method does not
always have all the answers. Since then he continued publishing with this
method and after so many years not learning anything from this aspect I decided
to recount the incident. In verse 7 Hosea speaks of the
mulitiplication of sins as their numbers increased. The KJV and the Darby is the closest
to the original in reading "as they were multiplied". The KJV, Darby
and the YLT read also "so they sinned against me". The RSV and NASB
interpreted in their translation "the more they multiplied the more they
sinned against me". In reality what you do have here is not an increase in
each person's sins, but an increase in the numbers of people sinning. It is
rather an indication that as people grew up they also became partakers of a
sinful habit. We do not accept the reading of the RSV and NASB. They have
attained some form of glory whether military wise or otherwise but that will be
turned to shame. Calvin translated it as "according to their multiplying"
and he did not see it only applicable to the men nor the wealth but every kind
of blessings multiplied. Calvin do think that it also includes an increase in
"their power, their horses and chariots" [military]. John Wesley
interpreted that they multiplied "in number, in riches, and honour". Sin means a separation from God.
Whether it is a small sin or a big sin, size does not determine the condition
of man in the eyes of God. Conversion and atonement are the only conditions
that could secure a relationship with God immaterial of the size of the sin. A
murderer could be close to God after receiving forgiveness and complete
atonement in the eyes of God and a very kind person could be rejected by God
since he/she had no interest in a relation with the Almighty. The secret is the
relation and conversion is the key. The sins that are applicable in this verse
are sins not atoned for. Hosea then said in verse 8 that
"They shall eat the sins of my people and unto their iniquity they shall
lift up their soul". The KJV did something very unusual in
this verse. Normally the KJV is fairly literal. However in this verse there is
an interchange between "soul" of the original and "heart"
of the KJV. The Masoretic text reads actually "his soul" but we do
not give full power to the vocalization of the Masoretic text. It is possible
without changing the consonants of the Masoretic text to read "their
soul". The KJV, Darby, YLT, NASB and RSV all used "their". In
Jerome's day there were no vowels and he also read "their" as did the
Septuagint. Calvin is very literal here and our reading is close to his:
"They eat, the sin of my people, and lift up to their iniquity his
soul." Calvin is reading in "his soul" the Masoretic
vocalization here which is also acceptable. This fluctuation in number from
plural to singular says Calvin leaves us the option to choose whether the
passage is only applicable to the priests or also to the people. He stated that
it can also be translated: "upon their iniquity they lift up their
soul". John Wesley though, interpreted the verse as solely applicable to
the priests. The priests are feeding on the sin of
God's people and unto the iniquity of the people of God these people of God
lifts up the soul of the priest. The Remnant will be a problem but the
preachers also (verse 9): "And it has been: like people like priest. And I
will visit upon them their ways and their deeds I will return to him". The KJV, RSV, NASB and Darby
translated here the future "and it shall be". The commentary of
Calvin on Hosea also read the future here. The YLT is here correctly reading
the original as "and it has been". The similarity of people and
priest was a given fact and serves as a precondition to the punishments that
will follow. The way the KJV, RSV, NASB and Darby reads it means that in future
the priest will be like the people and the people will be like the priest and
God will visit them then and will return their deeds unto them. It rather seems
as if God is angry at the moment of speech so that this condition is already
existing or present during the time of speaking or writing. The punishment
though, is future. The Septuagint and Vulgate read it as future but again that
is no reason for reading it as such. The previous verse is dealing with an
already existing fact that priests are feeding on the sin of God's people. Why
the first part of verse 9 should now be future, is hard to understand. The end result is that both are the
same. God will visit upon their ways and their deeds God will return to the
priest. The priest will be accountable for their deeds. They will be eating a lot but not be
satisfied and have habits of sleeping around (verse 10). What it means that people are eating
but not be satisfied is probably that people are eating junk food. Junk food is
of the character that it does not contain enough vitamins to fulfill the needs
of the body so a person feels hungry again. An interesting situation is that
they will commit fornication but not multiply. This was the time before the
condoms so one wonders if this has reference to the end time when condoms are
freely available or to Hosea's time when they were probably in a position not
to have children? Calvin pointed out that the principle in this verse is that
"men are not sustained by plenty or abundance of provisions, but rather by
the blessing of God". This is definitely underlying the verse. The last
part of the verse is interpreted by Calvin to mean that the Lord will strike
them with barrenness". Calvin correctly indicated that forsaking the Lord
is the source and chief cause of all evils. Calvin then extrapolate a principle
that is still employed by Calvinists in their own system of modern
church-discipline: that whosoever keeps faith with God, keeps himself also
under the tuition of his word, and wanders not after his own inventions. Modern
Calvinists are very strict against those who are experimenting with their faith
in finding new strata of fellowship. Calvin said that the problem of the
Israelites was that they have shaken off the yoke of the law, but in his own day
Calvin was keeping the Sunday whereas the law requires Saturday. This is an
interesting anomaly in the presentation of Calvin at this point. They will get involved in actions
pertaining to woman, wine and songs, thus hedonism, a constant desire for
entertainment (verse 11). The RSV did something in this verse
that the other translation did not do. Since the original manuscripts or
earlier ones did not have a separation in sentences or verses it was thus
legitimate to connect "znwt" as the first word in Hosea 4:11 with the
previous verse and end verse 10 after "in order to obey fornication"
(or) with the RSV "to cherish harlotry". We have not done that. The
RSV and NASB have interpreted "will take away the heart" as
"take away the understanding". It is true that alcohol has an effect
on the brain's functions but it is also true that alcohol in the long run
affects the heart. It is better to consider the following option: these
elements, fornication and wine causes a person to give up previous loyalties
and assists a person to easily get attached to new loyalties. It takes the
heart away from the one to whom it legally and rightfully belong. A new
relation can result because of these elements. Since Hosea used the Hebrew word
for understanding in Hosea 4:14 we do not agree with the RSV and NASB to
translate here "understanding". John Wesley also understood it to
mean "their understanding and judgment". These actions are perceived
as still in future. By forsaking the Lord (a fact that already occurred, see
the past of the verb in verse 10c), the Lord is expecting in future other
things to result: they will fornicate and drink and that will take away their
heart or loyalty to God.
verse 10c verse 11 PAST TENSE FUTURE TENSE the Lord they have forsaken fornication, wine will take away their
heart The wayward Remnant will consult wood
and sticks and a spirit of fornication (ecumenism) will lead them and they will
fornicate from under the gods of those whom they wish to make aliances with
"from under their gods" (verse 12). How "telling" and
"oracles" are related is not easy to see. The definition of
"oracles" and what we know now in history about that phenomenon would
not exactly be what the original had in mind here. In Africa some people use a
stick in a "Y" formation to point to the presence of water in the
earth. The "pointing" action is then a "telling" action.
There are no oracles or words yet my uncle was able to "point" to the
place where the drill was supposed to be installed. Whereas the original is
using here the future tense, KJV, RSV, NASB, YLT and Darby translated it as
past. So did also Calvin and John Wesley. Following the line of thought of the
previous verse other things will result in future because they have forsaken
(past tense, verse 10c), the Lord.
verse 10c verse 11 verse 12 PAST TENSE FUTURE TENSE FUTURE TENSE have forsaken (Lord) fornicating, drinking will ask his staff will take away
heart wood will tell them
PAST TENSE a
spirit of fornicating misled FUTURE TENSE they
will fornicate under their gods
Interpretation: First we need to say something about
the expression "my people". This expression is explained by Calvin as
a sign that God favored some people among all nations to be his heritage or
own. These people are "His peculiar flock", Calvin continued. The
people of God will consult wooden idols and certain sticks will be used by them
to worship God. People will make an object to represent their idea or concept
of God and then they will act to the object as if it is a reality. They will
use an idea to represent the reality and then they will deal with the
representation as if it is the reality. This is what God is expecting that will
result from them forsaking the Lord (verse 10c). Since the past tense is used
for verse 12c it means that a spirit of fornicating already is misleading them.
The action of fornicating and drinking will take away their relationship with
God. They will set up another relation with other gods. This phenomenon of an
object to replace the reality I experienced also in the orient. In Japan a
person was killed in a car accident on one of the corners at Nasioshiobara in
the Tochigi prefecture. On the pavement of the street they have erected a
statue of the person made of stone. However, when the winter came and the snow
they placed a red cap on the statue's head and a scarf around its neck. They
made a representation of the reality of the past and are now dealing with that
representation as if it is the reality. When a person comes to this point God
is not pleased with the situation. They are worshipping with the heathens under
trees which is their gods and there they are participating in fornicateing,
drawn away by that spirit. Fornication is condemned in scripture and that
action is leading or misleading the people of God to the worship of other gods
besides God Himself, and God is not pleased with that. Concerning the
expression "from under their God" Calvin commented that they did not
remain focussed from under the government of God but wandered off. Symbol vs reality The whole problem with Israel is that
they made symbols of reality and treated the symbols as reality. God hates this
situation. Hench his prohibition against images for worship. Some think if they carry the Christian
cross around their neck, that it would make them more "holy" than
others. It certainly does not affect the non-religious buddhist young
generations of Japan and South Korea who swing drunk out of a disco, cigarette
in the hand, earring of the cross, swearing as far as they are walking at two
o' clock in the morning in Seoul or Tokyo. Christian? The symbol is not a
carrier of the reality. To imprint an image of Christ on a
condom will not make the condom more "holy" or Christ more
sacriligous. The fact that Mary held Jesus in her arms, in her womb, on her
breasts, kissed him, hugged him, does not make her any holier than any other
mother. Unless she believed that He was indeed the Messiah that came to be
atonement for all, she is no better off than any other woman. In modern evangelical meetings some
attempt to control the environment: the volume level of the speakers, the
rythm, speed and tunes of the songs and music to "carry people into God's
arms". This is not the way God works although there is not anything wrong
with this fever of them to be assisting in the conversion of souls. This
enthusiasm should be there, but it is human. Some speakers say that they can
feel the Holy Spirit is moving around in the meeting at a certain point, but
how do they feel it? The people who start to cry? People cried when Kim,
Jung-il, the chief of staff of South Korea's father died. People cried when Hitler
spoke some of his public speeches. The list can go on. It become very difficult
to distinguish mass-hysteria from the working of the Spirit of God. The Spirit
can work in a quiet environment as well, and these phenomena at public meetings
are too hastily connected to reality and even replaced as the reality itself.
Despite the fact that it is human, a lot of good come from these meetings. They
do not guarantee a lasting Christian but they certainly evidenced it in some.
And this is the point of Hosea: all works of man are fragile, artistically only
copying, acting out, dramatizing, but God is the one who does the actual work,
completing it. In his book: The Icon Road (Japan:
Kawade Shoboushingsha, 1997), Sanjiro Minamikawa visited places in the Meditterranean
and brought together photos of as many icons as he could see. He visited places
on the Red Sea, Greece, Italy, Paris, off the coast of the Black sea and at
least three places in Russia. The book is filled with examples that
would have made Hosea very uncomfortable. On every page is an icon of Christ
portraying his face: a Beatle face (1), dressed like a scottish pipe player
dated to 494 (5), a long elongated face and hands similar to that of Buddha
(6), a face that looks like one of my cousins (7), a death portrayal of Christ
from the 15th century comparing to the death of Buddha on page 15 of the book
by Giro Sugiyama, Shape of Buddha (Tokyo: Kashiwa Shobou Kabushikigaisha, 1984)
(9 also 76), angry face (12), whitened face like a ghost (13), angry face (34 also 124), two old men on
thrones probably portraying God and Jesus (46-7), long elongated face (53
bottom), a face similar to one of my portuguese friends (56 on the ceiling), a
face like an Australian friend who was my neigbour during my studies in the USA
(61), a face similar to one of the famous black movie stars (62), dark Arabic
face (73), feministic portrayal of Christ on a donkey entering Jerusalem (77),
Christ's baptism with his penis shown (81), face with blond hair (97), face
like an old man of 75 with white hair and beard. It is no better with Buddha. There are
angry buddhas, smiling buddhas, naked buddhas, fully dressed buddhas, reclining
buddhas, overweight buddhas, well-shaped buddhas, Greek/Roman and Indian and
Oriental Buddhas. The similarities between the
sculptures of Christ and Buddha makes one wonder which came first, the chicken
or the egg? What can we make of all this? It
simply means that no-one knew how Christ was or how Buddha was. All the artists
portrayed their own friends and loved ones as these figures and the sculptures
do not become any holier than the hand who shaped them. It does not matter
whether it is Buddha in the shape of Jesus or Jesus in the position of Buddha -
there is no merit in them and they are only to be perceived as a well designed
or poorly designed piece of art, worth preserving to demonstrate the trends in
art. The priests of one of these orthodox
churches (104-5) are walking through the street with their white robes and
golden decorations and soldiers in white uniforms are carrying a silver and
gold plated domelike shrine on a pedestal while people are anxious to see or
touch it. In similar vein the buddhist festivals are celebrated with the same
effect upon the people here in the orient. A lady is kissing a silverplated box
in an orthodox church while others are waiting in line. The orthodox church on page 110 is so
overdecorated that to be blind would be a blessing if one has to worship in
that church every week. There is no difference between the inside of this
church and some of the buddhist temples here in the orient. On 117 the pulpit
is turned around to face the icons instead of the people. In a wedding ceremony (129) the brides
are holding in their hands icons of Maria and the child while the men are
holding icons of Jesus. They do not touch it directly since it is wrapped in a
white cloth. Men with long white beards and dressed
in long over-decorated garments are walking outside the church while the public
are in the background watching the spectacular (137). The garments reminded me
of Harry Anderson's Bible Story pictures that I used to read as a child
portraying the high priest of Israel. Here nearly every priest is a high
priest. Their headwear has round and oval shaped icons of Jesus in them. On
both sides one and one in front. Their long garments are embroided with
crosses, flowers to the extreme. Long white beards are the fashion. Around
their necks they are wearing overdecorated scarfs. The three domes of the
church each has a cross on it and the little dome outside the front door also
has a cross. It is as if one cross is not enough. Every leg of the cross has
its own cross. Crosses in multiplication. The cross is meant to be a concept in
the mind of the believer, not a wooden, golden, silver, object on a roof, or on
your clothes or around your neck. Orthodox Jewish movements have also
misunderstood the same principle regarding the Law that was and is supposed to
be engraved upon the mind of the worshipper not on a piece of leather, metal,
paper in a small box bound around your head and your arms. There is no
difference in the misunderstanding here between some Jewish religious groups
and the Law of God and some Christian groups and the cross. They are outside but they are walking
on embroided carpets. The public is not standing on embroided carpets, they are
not wearing any of these embroided garments so the focus is over there in the
theater of religious display. The priests are getting a "kick" out of
this "lime light" episode but this katharsis is no different than the
craving of a modern movie star or stage performer in the arts for the cameras
of the mass media. When religion separates itself from the public it becomes a
frenzy only for the initiated. A cult. There are more than 14 ways or
gestures in which the hands of Buddha are portrayed by artists through the
centuries. At times the gestures compares with that of Christ and at other
times only with a different finger in a particular position. The positions of
Buddha's hands can be seen in the book: Kasuo Nagakaka, Japanese Sculptures of
Buddha (Tokyo: Sekibutsjiteng, 1975), 360-361 on page ??????. Mostly Buddha
touch with his thumb the pointing finger or middle finger. Christ touch in
these icons with his thumb his second finger next to the smallest. The right
hand of Buddha in Nagakaka no. 6 and the right hand of Christ in the icon of
Minamikawa page 30 are nearly the same except that the fingers are different as
indicated above. The hands in the icon of Jesus in Minamikawa page 33 resembles
those of Buddha in Nagakaka no. 14. The right hand of the icon of Jesus on the
ceiling of the chapel of Minamikawa page 56-7 resembles that of Buddha in
Nagakaka no. 7. In another book, Giro
Sugiyama, Shape of Buddha (Tokyo: Kashiwa Shobou Kabushikigaisha, 1984) 104-105
there are 10 ways in which the hands of Buddha are portrayed: praying hands (1
= Nagakaka no. 12); all fingers clutched together in between each other into a
unified fist (2); upside down with thumbs touching (4 = Nagakaka no. 2); with
palms shown to the viewer and thumb and finger of each hand touching as if to
portray two coins (6 = Nagakaka no. 4);
pointer finger of left hand pushed under and into the clutch fist of the
right hand (3 = Nagakaka no. 1); right hand is thumb and pointer touching and
looks like a rabbit while the left hand is the same with pointer and thumb
towards the stomach (5 = Nagakaka no. 5); two fists are made but the pointer
touch the thumb (7 = Nagakaka no. 14?); left hand is down and right hand is up
(8 = Nagakaka nos. 9 and 8 respectively); the middle and fourth finger are
slightly bend to the inside while other fingers are straight with hand up or
the right hand and the left hand is holding some kind of a ball the size of an
egg (9 = Nagakaka no. 7 especially for the right hand); the right hand is
pointing to the floor and the left hand is horizontal on the stomach (10 =
Nagakaka no. 13). There cannot be any holiness in this
kind of cult and neither are there. Holiness does not recide in objects or
people or places. It is eternal, invisible, freely available as a presence to
anyone at any time whoever asks for it. With people drawing so much attention
to themselves with the drapery, holy dances, gestures, staffs or crosses or
icons or other shining objects, God has to find another way to talk to the
masses. You don't have to dress like Jesus in order to speak to the people,
just dress as they do in everyday life. In every generation as they do. Meet
the people where they are, do not expect them to always come to you. What Hosea is seeing is a period of
feministic involvement in the ministry of outside religions (verse 13).
"They will sacrifice on the tops of the mountains and will burn on the
hills, under oak, and poplar and terebinth, for good is the shade. Therefore
your daughters shall fornicate and your daughters-in-law shall
adulturate." The people of God will sacrifice on
the tops of the mountains and burn on the hills under various kinds of trees.
It is interesting that Buddhism and many other religions prefer the top of
hills and mountains for their cultic space. The temple must be high so that the
approach is upward to the god. In the Egyptian temples they built it with
levels rising until one reaches the sanctuary. They reason is that the sense of
awe and oppressiveness was increased the nearer the god is approached (Rosalie
David, A Guide to Religious Ritual at Abydos [England: Aris & Phillips Ltd,
1981], 2). The Assyrians and Babylonians erected temples and palaces on
artificial platforms. A flight of steps lead up to the elevation. Whereas the
outside and inside of Mesopotamian temples were important for effect, in Egypt
it was only the outside which was impressive with the massive pylons. Inside it
was plain with the height slowly decreasing as one walks deeper into the
temple. In the time of Assurnasirpal II (883-859 BCE) examples of the holy tree
was very common but in the time of Shalmaneser III it was limited. Only one
example is known from this king (Erika Bleibtreu, Die Flora der neuassyrischen
Reliefs [Wien: Verlag des Institutes fur Orientalistik der Universitat Wien,
1980], 75). It appears to this researcher that the holy tree was a Phoenician
influence and during the days of Shalmaneser III Phoenician influence were
restricted. From the time of Adadnirari III (810-783 BCE) comes only one
example of a holy tree. His successors only created one example of a holy tree
(ibid., 77). During the time of Tiglathpileser III the sacred tree was used in
historical war scenes. This was an example of the connection between religion
and history (ibid., 92). Tiglathpileser also built a palace out of Sederwood
which stresses the importance of wood to this Assyrian ruler (Hermann Weidhaas,
"Der Bit Hilani," ZA [nf] 11 [1939]: 108ff.). Since the men will be involved
in these cultic activities under the trees the women will fornicate. It could
be that the militant theology of the Assyrians contained some cultic actions
for the soldiers under the trees which influenced also Israel. In Deuteronomy
12:2 it is said that all the places where people worship their gods, be it
mountains, hills and under trees, should be torn down. If the men or soldiers
are giving up their loyalty to other cultic gods and ceremonies, then the
"mothers of Israel" or spouses are prone to easily transfer their
loyalty too. T H E F A C T THE PROBABILITY verse 10c verse 12c verse 14 PAST TENSE PAST TENSE FUTURE TENSE have forsaken (Lord) a spirit of fornication men shall sacrifice (mountains) is misleading them men shall offer (on hills)
girls shall fornication
married girls shall adulturate
If we are to think of a timing for
this event then it is probably the best to go to the life of King Ahaz (736-716
BC). As king of Judah during his days there were pagan temples on the mountains
and hills. 2 Chronicles 28:4 relates that Ahaz worshipped on the hills, under
every shady tree he offered sacrifices and burned incense. North of Schehem was
the city of Samaria and that is where 200 000 woman and children were taken
after the Syrian war in 731 BC. Aramaeans were also transported to Samaria from
Sepharvaim. Albright and others maintained that they worshipped there
Adrammelech, a form of the god Hadad, but this is not sure (Davis, page 196,
footnote 126). The period after this war would have resulted in intermarraige
and also in princes of Judah who are anxious to move the borders of Judah?
Suddenly strong ties existed between the area of Samaria and Judah on a
physical relation level. While the grandmothers and grandfathers were in Judah
still, the children and grandchildren were north of Ephraim in Samaria. Hosea then speaks of Women Ordination,
a concept that is foreign to God's Revelation but welcomed in outside
religions. The females will sacrifice in the sanctuary (verse 14). "I will
not visit upon your daughters for they will fornicate, and upon your daughters-in-law for they will
adulturate, for they (men) with fornicators will go aside and with the
sanctuary girls will they sacrifice. And a people without understanding shall
perish." Jerome in the Latin Vulgate translate
that they "offered sacrifice with the effeminate" = et cum
effeminatis sacrificabant. Since the men will be going to the
sanctuaries of these other nations and spent time with the temple girls,
therefore their wives and daughters will also fornicate around. There is reason to think that the Deir
⊃Alla
inscription might give us more understanding in the role of women in the
religious cults. If one places Combination I = i(d) next to Combination II =
ii(a) top + ii(b) bottom so that lines 14 of Combination I is in line with line
10 of Combination II, the results are startling. With the prominent features in
the text, the definite line, the broad margin and the scratch at the bottom one
can rearrange the pieces. There are word connections that helps one to
reconstruct a story. To just consult the results of J. Hoftijzer and G. van der
Kooij, Aramaic Texts from Deir ⊃Alla (Leiden:
E. J. Brill, 1976) is a good start but the puzzle needs to be reassembled
again. It is not progress to just merely rely on their results. The last has
not been said about this inscription. In this inscription the way we have
assembled it the prophet named Bileam received a vision and he wept about it. His
uncle took him to an assembly. He prepares a meal or offering for El. Wailingly
he devours the dinner and from fragment viii(b) combined with fragments xii(e)
from left to right followed by v(c) followed by xii(c) and viii(d) a line can
be reconstructed that reads: "...he completes the mixoffering
from El along with which he is withdrawn..." ywn.w?pr
[------]yn.w[------]s?.nlh.[bl.mn.⊃l]⊃t.ntq.------⊂[--]
"[from] trembling be freed
[...oil] of olives along with which [he drinks] from the wine/strong drink.
Excited he eats [for the Saddayi]n...they came in
crowds..........................why do you weep? and wailingly he
devours.........he will open to profane......which they all together conceal
(themselves) the satiation of the loved ones.... [p]?d.?p?[?m]nzyt.⊃t[styw]mn.?mr.⊂rt.⊃kl.[----------]n.⊃[---------d⊂ rn.⊃kl.[-------]pt?[-]l?l⊂[----------------------------h.tbh.wy⊃ ⊂lmh.rwy.ddn.k[----------------] What is interesting is that at times
it seems as if eschatological jargon is weaved into the whole text in bits and
pieces. It even seems that true prophecy is mixed with this cult which could
have been quotations from the true prophets misused as lingua for this cult.
Wine was definitely part of the cult since they are said to "they drank
wine and the aggrievers listens to exhortations" = ?tyw.?mr.wqb⊂n.?m⊂w.nwsr.
(see Combination I at i(d) line 7 if our calculation is correct). If we return to the words of Hosea he
said that a people without understanding shall perish. Hosea 4:14 proofs that
fornication is not the issue. The issue is that the men will be dealing with
religious practices foreign and unacceptable to God. It is a religious issue
not a lifestyle issue. If they are without a knowledge of God (the true God)
they will perish. To stop fornication in life is to gain knowledge of God. The
two are related. The issue here is the knowledge of God and that is why God
will not visit those that fornicate. He is sharp against the men if they are
going to the temples. As we have seen in our analysis these actions will result
since they have forsaken their Lord. The inevitable result is that the family
will disintegrate and a people without understanding of God shall perish
(compare verse 6 "my people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" and
also in verse 1d where it states that the key issue is "and without a
knowledge of God". God's point in this verse is that it is useless to
reform the women when the men are leading the way in disloyal relationships.
The key issue is: there is no knowlege of God (1d); they have forsaken the Lord
(10c); a spirit of fornication is misleading them (12c); and now God is
brainstorming with a checklist of
possible deeds that will inevitably result from the course of action of the
men. The men will go to other cultic practices and the women will fornicate
around at home. The family destroyed. Calvin had the same idea when he said:
"He then who worships not God, shall have at home an adulterous wife, and
filthy strumpets as his daughters, boldly playing the wanton, and he shall have
also adulterous daughters-in-law". It is interesting that Calvin employed
the book of Romans 1 here where Paul said: "as men have transferred the
glory of God to dead things, so God also gave them up to a reprobate
mind." The "go aside" action is rightly indicated by Calvin to
be an action of "dividing" or "separating themselves from
God." Historically it is clear that now that the woman and children were
transferred to Samaria north of Ephraim that these relationships would be inevitable
but God is saying that this is not the issue for him. It is the men who are
already worshipping in these pagan temples. It is the actions of king Ahaz that
brought the Syrian war and it is the Syrian war that brought about the
separation of the woman and children from Judah and the key issue now is why
must God deal with wrong practices by these woman in that area that was to
happen anyway. The original actions of the men was the bone of contention for
God. Calvin concluded this verse with a
prayer that is indeed worth quoting in full: "Grant, Almighty God, that
inasmuch as we are so disposed and inclined to all kinds of errors, to so many
and so various forms of superstitions, and as Satan also ceases not to lay in
wait for us, and spreads before us his many snares, - O grant, that we may be
so preserved in obedience to thee by the teaching of thy word, that we may
never turn here and there, either to the right hand or to the left, but
continue in that pure worship, which thou hast prescribed, so that we may
plainly testify that thou art indeed our Father by continuing under the
protection of thy only-begotten Son, whom thou hast given to be our pastor and
ruler to the end. Amen." The application is to spiritual Israel
by Hosea in verse 15. They should not let Judah trespass, they should not enter
Gilgal or ascend Beth Aven or swear 'living is the Lord' (verse 15). There are at least two different forms
of private Greek translations by Aquila dating originally to 130 CE but which
survived in the following way: (GAquila130reconSYRO-HEXAPLA616reconCODEX
AMBROS.ORIGENES-HEXAPLA=FIELD1875). It means the Greek of Aquila dating to 130
CE reconstructed from the Syro-Hexapla dating to 616 as reconstructed from the
codex Ambrosianus but which is really a reconstruction of the Greek Hexapla of
Origen as edited by Field in 1875. Greek Private Edition's English
Translation Aquila 1 If a fornicator you are Israel, may
you not offend Judah, [may you not lead Galgal, and may you not go up] unto the
house of unprofitableness and may you not swear: Living is the Lord. There are
four forms of Symmachus (originally 170 CE) and three froms of Theodotion Greek
translations (originally 190 CE).
In this verse we have the unfortunate
situation that there are no less than four Symmachusses, three Theodotions and
two Aquilas. The sources that are available are not unison on what they
actually read. The information is scanty and conflicting. If one follows the
Codex Ambrosianus then Aquila read very close to the consonantal text of the
Masoretic tradition. If one follows Codex 86 then Aquila read a para-biblical
text that was by mistake regarded to be the original and which was used by the
Greek of the fifth centuries CE and also by Jerome. Talking about Jerome: since
Hosea 2:20 we do not have any longer the oldest text s dating to 450 CE
available and must rely on copies three hundred years later. We are not sure
whether these copies between 750-960 CE should be seen as a pseudo-Jerome and
not the original Jerome since there is a strong connection between the Greek of
the fifth century and these Latin manuscripts in the variants that they are
sharing. The Greek of the fifth century CE used a para-biblical text with a
Qumrannic character as their Vorlage that resulted in many variants from the
original. Why would Jerome who objected against the problems of the Septuagint
of his day, used the same manuscript to end up with the same variants? It does
not make sense especially considering his vehement debate with Augustine.
Contrary to Codex Ambrosianus which predates the manuscripts of 750-960 CE,
these Latin manuscripts indicate that Jerome read a Hebrew Vorlage similar to
that which Codex 86, also a copy of the Syro-hexapla just like Codex
Ambrosianus, is claiming that Aquila read.
Though the translations all translated
the future tenses of the previous verses as past tense, they now translate the
past tense as a present tense. The conditional particle "if" used in
the original is translated by the KJV, YLT, RSV, Darby and NASB as "though".
They want to make the sentence presentistic as a fact in the days of Hosea. We
do keep to the conditional particle and translate the sentence as a condition.
It is a condition since the previous actions that were describe in the previous
verses were probability (future tenses) not necessarily fact (past tense). The
results did not necessarily occurred yet and that is why God is saying that if
they are fornicating (which He predicted they will if they follow through with
their course of action) then they must not mislead Judah. The Vulgate also
translated the conditional particle )m = "if" as si but the
Septuagint skip over it. This important aspect is part of the dilemmas in the
translations so far. Since the future tenses of the verbs in verses 11-14 were
translated as past tense by the KJV, RSV, NASB, YLT and Darby they have to
translate the past tense as a present tense in verse 15 and ignore the
conditional particle )m. In our translation we do not need to ignore the
condition since we have discovered that the future tenses are used anyway for
these actions in verses 11-14 and thus a conditional sentence is but just a
continuation of the previous line of presentation. Since everything from verse
11 is probability not fact therefore the conditional (a probability mood) is
perfectly appropriate in our line of thinking for verse 15. Not so with the
KJV, RSV, NASB, YLT and Darby. Since the actions in verses 11-14 are viewed as
facts by the scholars of these translations, therefore the reappearing of one
of the actions from verses 11-14 (fornicating in verse 15) cannot appear as a
condition or probability in verse 15 when it was a fact before in verses 11-14!
The solution: ignore the original and ignore the conditional particle. We do
not follow this line of interpretation or translation. This is the unfortunate
role of preteristic thinking in the translation process. It is carrying into
the text something that is not there in the original. The admonition here must be put into
context. The men (see previous verse) who are fornicating, they are asked not
to influence Judah also to follow them to these foreign temples. When they are
participating in these cultic actions in another cultic space than that
acceptable to God then God does not want to hear from their mouths that the Lord
is living. We are not sure whether Gilgal and Beth Aven were the good places
where the evil men should not come to or whether God is instructing the evil
men not to go to these evil places? John Wesley indicated that these places
were used by Jeroboam for his worship of idols. Calf worship was at Beth-aven (http://wesley.nnc.edu/wesley/notes/hosea.htm#chapter+IV).
They are not to influence Judah with there habits.
FACT PROBABILITY verse 1c PAST TENSE there is no knowledge of God verse 10c verse
11 PAST TENSE FUTURE TENSE the Lord they have forsaken fornicating, wine will taken
away
their heart
verse 12a-b
FUTURE TENSE
will ask their staff
wood
will tell them