Criswell Theological Review 7.1 (1993) 15-38
[Copyright © 1993 by
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
THE PROPHETIC DENUNCIATION OF
RELIGION IN HOSEA 4-7
M. DANIEL CARROLL R.
El Seminario Teologico Centroamericano
Defining
the Approach
The issue of
religion is central to any understanding of the background
and
message of the Book of Hosea. In this prophetic text both the per-
sonal life of the prophet, as well as national
religious life, have drawn
scholarly
interest. The most celebrated interpretative problem, of course,
concerns the
first three chapters and the relationship of the prophet with
Gomer
(and, some would argue, with another woman in chap. 3), and the
connection of
this narrative to Canaanite religious practice.l
In years past, certain scholars also
highlighted the harsh critique
of ritual in
6:6 (cf. 4:1-2, 15; 5:5; 8:13; 9:4; 12:11) and other prophetic
texts
(e.g., Amos 4:4-5; 5:4-5, 21-26); ethical monotheism was claimed
1 For recent detailed
surveys of scholarly opinions, see, e.g., R K. Harrison, Intro-
duction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1969) 861-68; R E. Clements,
Understanding
the Book of Hosea, Rev
Exp 72 (1975) 408-12; G. I. Davies, Hosea (Old
Testament
Guides;
"The
Marriage Motif in Israelite Religion in Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays
in Honor
of
Frank Moore Cross,
eds. P. D. Miller, Jr., P. Hanson, S. D. McBride (
tress,
1987) 421-28. H. L. Ginsberg, following Kaufmann, believes that chaps. 1-3 come
from
another prophet and refer to the Baal worship of the ninth-century under Ahab:
chaps.
4ff. would reflect later struggles within Yahwism (“Hosea,
Book of,” Encyclopaedia
Judaica [
offered a
materialist reading of these chapters and concludes that they are a metaphoric
description of
the political economy: the wife alludes to the warrior elite and the children
to the
peasant classes ("Agricultural Intensification as Promiscuity in the Book
of Hosea;
unpublished
paper, Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, 1993; for a sum-
mary, see AAR/SBL Abstracts 1993, 137).
16 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
to be
the unique and lasting contribution of those who spoke for Yah-
weh. Accordingly, textbooks on prophetism sometimes have dedicated
space to
clarifying that the prophets did not desire the eradication of
all
formal religion, but rather exhorted the people to live out their
faith in
mercy and justice and not to limit belief in God to mere exter-
nal religious rites.2
Recent research into the nature of religion in eighth-century Pal-
estine and the analysis of the textual data of
Hosea have moved beyond
simply
attempting to establish the practice of certain non-Yahwistic
rit-
uals, such as cultic prostitution,3
to a broader investigation of mono-
theism in
ancient
to
widespread syncretism, popular as well as official, throughout the
monarchical
period. New approaches posit a contested and difficult rise
of
monotheism, which would contrast with the biblical picture of the
revelation of a
single deity at the very beginning of
Lang, for
instance, postulates that the prophet Hosea is an important
figure in
the development and eventual success of what he labels the
2 E.g., J. Lindblom, Prophecy in
Ancient
60
(Interestingly, some of the concerns of Wellhausen
and Duhm have been raised again
by J.
Barton in Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in
[
American
Liberation Theology, J. P. Miranda defends the strict anti-cultus
stance that a
first
reading of certain prophetic passages might suggest: according to his critical
recon-
struction, God can only be found in interhuman justice (Marx and the Bible: A Critique
of the
Philosophy of Oppression,
trans. J. Eagleson [Maryknoll:
Orbis, 1974] 44-67; cf.
J. Pixley," dExige el Dios verdadero sacrificios cruentos?,” Revista de interpretaciOn biblica
latinoamericana 2 [1988] 109-31). On the other hand, some
suggest a close tie between
Hosea and the cult. H. W. Wolff has proposed that Hosea was a member of a Levitical circle
in Hosea
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) xxii-xxiii (cf. R R
Wilson, Prophecy and Society
in
Ancient
ceived widespread acceptance.
3 See below, n. 37.
4 For
a helpful introduction to issues involved in the larger debate,
see D L. Petersen,
"
Interpretation:
Essays in Honor of Brevard S. Childs, eds. G. M. Tucker, D L. Petersen, R. R.
growth and
official imposition of monotheism and who provide helpful bibliography, al-
though
defending different reconstructions, include M S. Smith, The Early History
of God:
Yahweh and
the Other Deities in Ancient
O. Keel and
C. Uehlinger, Gottinnen,
Gotter und Gottessymbole. Neue Erkenntnisse zur
Religionsgeschichte Kanaans und
phischer Quellen (Freiberg: Herder, 1992); and various
essays in part one of Ancient
Israelite Religion, 3-299. A helpful survey of the
archaeological data, which does not deal
directly with
the thorny issue of development, is found in R. S. Hess, "Yahweh and his
Asherah? Epigraphic Evidence for Religious
Pluralism in Old Testament Times" in One
God, One
Lord in a World of Religious Pluralism, eds. A D Clarke and B. W. Winter (
bridge: Tyndale House, 1991) 5-33.
M. Daniel
Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 17
"Yahweh-alone movement."5 Some scholars, accordingly, would also
question the
objectivity of the presentation of the nature of Canaanite
religion in
OT texts, as these are now evaluated as evidence of this con-
certed effort to give an aggressively negative
view of a competing faith.
This
article, however, does not try to tackle the complex task of trying
either to
define precisely what were the elements of Canaanite religion
that the
prophet Hosea found distasteful, or to locate his ministry and
message
within the current debate on monotheism.
In addition to this issue of uncertainty in the establishing of a
pre-
cise religious setting for the background of
the Book of Hosea, is the
problem of
ascertaining clear historical referents. The lack of explicit
historical
information and the fact that the title (1:1) suggest a ministry
spanning
decades sometimes can make confident identification of
tual particulars difficult.6
The following discussion of chaps. 4-7 takes a more literary ap-
proach to the final form of this prophetic text.7
The goal is to try to
understand the
world within the text, instead of focusing on the rela-
tionship of the biblical data to eighth-century
which lies
behind the text. Space will not permit a detailed reading,
which
would involve a careful investigation of the poetics of the book--
that is,
elements such as detailed structural analysis, style, figurative
5 B.
Lang, "The Yahweh-alone Movement and the Making of Jewish Monotheism;
Monotheism
and the Prophetic Minority (The
Social World of Biblical Antiquity Series 1;
Hosea
include G. I. Emmerson's attempt to differentiate the
prophet's original religious cri-
tique from the one embodied in the present form
of the text, which is claimed to be the
work of Judaean redactors (Hosea, An Israelite Prophet in Judaean Perspective [
JSOT, 1984]
chap. 3); W. I. Toews analyzes Hosea's critique
within the larger framework of
the
reforms of Jeroboam I (Monarchy and Religious Institution under Jeroboam I
[
Scholars Press, 1993] 151-72).
6
Note, e.g., the comments by F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Hosea (Garden City:
Doubleday, 1980) 313. Their reluctance to specify historical details with absolute
certainty
goes
beyond just facile identification of historical referents (names, places and
events) to
include
avoiding speculation about possible cultic or social settings of the prophetic
oracles
(72-74, 313-17),
which is a major concern of the form critical approach utilized by com-
mentators such as Wolff and Mays. Attempts to
coordinate oracles with particular moments
in the
prophet's ministry abound. For a recent effort, see Davies, Hosea,
30-37. Another
related
issue is how the book itself portrays
Hosea and Salvation History (Berlin: Walter de Groyter, 1990)
117-30.
7 The
phrase "the final form of the text" distinguishes our approach from
others that
concentrate on
sorting out what are considered to be original from later material (For a
defense of
the canonical form, see Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament
868-72,
and some
conservative commentaries such as D. A. Hubbard, Hosea [
InterVarsity, 1990] 31-34; cf. Andersen and Freedman, Hosea, 52-76,
316f.). Some evan-
gelicals would defend the integrity of the text on
theological grounds. Elsewhere I argue
for
taking the prophetic text (in that case, Amos) as literature for methodological
and
18 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
language,
point of view, plot, and characterization.8 Rather, some atten-
tion will be paid to the shape of these four
chapters and to how that might
contribute to
the highlighting of thematic aspects of the prophetic mes-
sage. In
other words, this presentation combines a literary with a topical
concern.
The issue to be explored is the nature of Yahweh religion within
the
world of the text of Hosea 4-7. Several questions spark the reading
of
these chapters. For example, what is the nature of
in
these chapters? What is Yahweh himself perceived to be like in this
religious
world? Why does the prophet condemn this religion which
claims to
worship Yahweh? Who are those most responsible for prac-
ticing and propagating this kind of belief in
Yahweh?
pastoral
reasons (M. D Carroll R, Contexts for Amos: Prophetic Poetics in Latin Ameri-
can
Perspective [
different
kinds of reading strategies deal with the final form of the biblical text. Note
the
helpful
methodological discussions by D. J. A. Clines ("Reading Esther from Left
to Right:
Contemporary
Strategies for Reading a Biblical Text") and M. G. Brett ("Four or
Five
Things to do
With Texts: A Taxonomy of Interpretive Interests") in The Bible in
Three Di-
mensions: Essays in Celebration of Forty Years of
Biblical Studies in the University of
77, respectively. For recent surveys of critical approaches, see G. A. Yee, Composition and
Tadition in the Book of Hosea: A Redactional
Critical Investigation (
Press, 1987)
1-25, and Davies, Hosea, 93-106.
Finally, it should be emphasized that this
is a
reading of Hosea alone. No effort will be made to pursue the fruitful insights gener-
ated by intertextual
readings; cf. D N. Fewell, ed., Reading Between
Texts: Intertextuality
and the
Hebrew Bible
(Louisville: WestminsterlJohn Knox, 1992). For an
example of such
an
approach to the Book of Hosea, see the essay in the same volume by D Krause,
"A
Blessing
Cursed: The Prophet's Prayer for Barren Womb and Dry Breasts in Hosea 9,”
191-202.
8 For
a general bibliography for these features, see Carroll
R, Contexts for Amos,
178-80. For some poetic details in this particular prophetic text,
note, e.g., R. B, Chisolm,
Jr.,
"Wordplay in the Eighth-Gentury Prophets," BS
144 (1987) 44-52; P. A. Krueger,
"Prophetic
Imagery: On Metaphors and Similes in the Book Hosea," JNSL 14 (1988)
143-51; P.
J. Botha, "The Communicative Function of
Comparison in Hosea," Old Testa-
ment Essays 6 (1993) 57-71; Davies, Hosea (OTG), 107-115; 1: Jemielity, Satire and the
Hebrew
Prophets
(Louisville: Westminster/ John Knox, 1992) 84-116; H. Fisch,
Poetry
with a
Purpose: Biblical Poetics and Interpretation (
Press, 1988) 136-57. P. R House has touched on characterization and plot in the book
of
Hosea, but
within the larger literary framework of the Book of the Twelve (The Unity
of the
Twelve [
the
prophetic text, which some literary readings suggest, should not ignore
supposed re-
dactional development Note, e.g., Yee, Composition
and Tradition in the book of Hosea
(cf. D. Carr, "Reaching for Unity in Isaiah," JSOT 57
[1993] 61-80). H.
Marks connects
his
views on the literariness of each of the Twelve with observations concerning
per-
ceived redactional
layers and the possible canonical markers of the final compilers
("The
Twelve Prophets," The Literary Guide to the Bible, eds. R. Alter
and
[
M. Daniel
Carroll R.: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 19
In the discussion, Hosea 4-7 is divided into three principle
parts.
These
chapters open with 4:1-3, which offers an introduction to what fol-
lows;
4:4-5:7 describes the worship in
trary to the divine demands; and, lastly,
5:8-7:16 critiques
politics and
foreign policy and their relationship to Israelite religion.
Introductory Accusation and Judgment
(4:1-3)
Most commentators consider this passage to be the introduction
which sets
the tone and lists the basic violations deserving of judgment
which will
be developed in the following chapters.9 The theological
framework for
this pericope is the Mosaic Covenant,10
whether in a
formal
sense as a covenant lawsuit11 or simply in a broader manner of
an
Indictment because of covenant violation.12
4:1 opens the accusation by mentioning the lack of three key cove-
nantal qualities: tm,x< ('emet),
ds,H, (hesed), and tfaDa (da'at).
The first has
been
translated in the versions as "good faith" (
(NASB, NIV,
NRSV). This term is related to the concept of truth and car-
ries the notions of constancy, reliability,
and integrity in word and deed.
Yahweh
himself is the standard by which this faithfulness is measured
(
9
E.g., for Andersen and Freedman, 4: 1-3 is the introduction to chaps. 4-7 (Hosea,
331); for D.
A. Hubbard it introduces chaps. 4-11 (Hosea, 95-96); for J. L. Mays
these
verses
introduce chaps. 4-14 (Hosea [Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1969] 61).
10 For
an extensive exposition of the notion of covenant in Hosea, see W. Bruegge-
mann, Hosea: Tradition for Crisis
(Atlanta: John Knox, 1968). Besides commentaries such
as D.
Stuart, Hosea-Jonah (Waco: Word, 1987), which makes extensive use of
covenant
theology,
also note J. Bright, Covenant and Promise: The Prophetic Understanding of
the
Future in
Pre-Exilic
ets, Vol. I: The Assyrian Period, trans. M.
Kohl (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 90-93;
J. Day,
"Pre-Deuteronomic Allusions to the Covenant in
Hosea and Psalm lxxviii; VT 36
(1986) 1-12.
Those not supporting a well developed covenant background for the proph-
ets include D. J. McCarthy, Old Testament
Covenant: A Survey of Current Opinion
(Atlanta:
John Knox, 1972) 35-40, 78f.; R E. Clements, Prophecy and Tradition (
Basil
Blackwell, 1978) 8-23. Cf. the discussion on recent developments in covenant
stud-
ies in K. Kitchen, "The Fall and Rise of
Covenant, Law and Treaty; Tyn Bul 40 (1989)
118-35.
11
Bright, Covenant and Promise 89-90; K. Nielsen, Yahweh as Prosecutor
and
Judge: An
Investigation of the Prophetic Lawsuit (Rib Pattern), (Sheffield: JSOT, 1978)
32-34; Mays,
Hosea, 61; Wolff, Hosea, 66; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, 7&-75 (Stuart
extends the
lawsuit to
the end of the chapter). Note, however, M. De Roche, "Yahweh's RIB
against
JBL 102
(1983) 563-74.
12 Andersen and Freedman, Hosea, 331; Hubbard, Hosea,
96.
13 See
A Jepsen, "Nmx," Theological Dictionary of
the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 1: 292-323; W. C. Kaiser, Toward Old
Testament Ethics (Grand
20 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
"mutual trust" (
(NRSV). A
reciprocal relationship is presupposed, and this bond is to be
made
manifest in actions. In the context of the prophets, this relationship
is the
covenant: Yahweh has committed himself to a particular people,
and they
are called to reflect this love and grace concretely with one an-
other in
the community.14 The last quality that is mentioned is tfd or
"knowledge."15 In the context of the book,
this knowledge certainly does
refer to a
certain theological content, such as the traditions of the Patri-
archs (12:3-4, 12 [MT = 12:4-5, 13]), of the
Exodus (
17]; 11:1-4;
12:9, 13 [MT =
13:5) and
the teachings of the Torah (4:6; 8:1, 12). But the term includes
as well
an understanding of Yahweh's covenantal demands which is to
be
reflected in obedience and moral conduct. Hence, the NIV translates
the
phrase Myhlx tfd here as "acknowledgement of God."
The list of five charges that follow in 4:2a offer an application
of the
three sins
of omission in 4:1 within human relationships.16
Although
the
knowledge of God is a more general concept, the lack of faithfulness
(tm,x<)
probably could be taken as fleshed out in cursing and lying, and
the
absence of steadfast love (ds,H,) in murder, stealing, and adultery.
Each of
these five corresponds to one of the Ten Commandments.17 The
last line
of this verse is very problematic,18 but it is possible that the
Rapids: Zondervan, 1983) 222-34. tmx and dsH often appear in hendiadys, but the fact
that
these terms appear as part of a list of three and each is prefixed by the
conjunction
+ negative particle would suggest that here they be considered
separately.
4 See
N. Glueck, Hesed
in the Bible, trans. (
1967); H.-J. Zobel, "dsH," Theological Dictionary of the
Old Testament (
Eerdmans, 1986) 5.44-64; Davies,
Hosea (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992) 94-97; B.
C.
Birch, Let
Justice Roll Down: The Old Testament, Ethics, and Christian Life (Louis-
ville:
15 See
J. Bergman and G. J. Botterweck, "fdy,"
Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament, 5.444-81; H. B. Huffmon,
'The Treaty Background of Hebrew YADA'";
BASOR 181
(1966) 131-77; Daniels, Hosea and Salvation History, 111-16.
16 Some
commentators hold that the last term, "knowledge," summarizes and is
the
basis of
the preceding two. See Glueck, Hesed
in the Bible, 57; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, 75;
C. E Keil, The Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977) X: 74f.; W: R.
Harper,
Amos and Hosea
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979) 250.
17 For
details, note especially Brueggemann, Hosea,
38-43; Hubbard, Hosea, 97.
Cf. Kaiser, Toward
Old Testament Ethics, 17f.
18 The
three primary options concerning the difficult vcrp are to consider it as: (1)
the
finite verb for the preceding five infinitive absolutes (Wolff, Hosea, 68; Mays, Hosea,
65; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah,
72; Davies, Hosea, 116; NRSV); (2) connected with the following
clause
describing the bloodshed (Andersen and Freedman, Hosea, 338f.; Hubbard, Hosea,
98); (3) a
separate item with its own meaning (T. McComiskey, The Minor Prophets: An
Exegetical
& Expositional Commentary, I: Hosea, Joel, and Amos [
1992] 57; Keil, The Minor Prophets,
75; Harper, Amos and Hosea, 250;
We take this
last option.
M. Daniel
Carroll R.: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 21
reference is
to two acts of cruel violence, making a total of seven viola-
tions. Thus the indictment is poetically
emphasized, as the sins of
add up
to a perfect number; their wickedness is complete.19 Several of
these
seven sins will be mentioned again in the following two major
sections.
They will be evident in cultic deviation and in the degrading
activities of
the people's worship (4:4-5:7), and then both in the refusal
to
trust him in national political affairs and in the struggles for power
and influence
(5:8-7:16).
If the discussion of 4:1-3 thus far has summarized the reasons for
the
denunciation (the "what" and the "why" in 4:1-2), there
still remain
to be
identified the "who" and "where"--that is, those that
practice and
are
responsible for the sin and the place of the sin and of the coming
judgment. 4:1
is a call to the "sons of
the
land; and 4:3a announces chastisement on "all who dwell in it."
This
thematic inclusio in this introductory pericope helps to emphasize
that the
whole population stands guilty before Yahweh. The transgres-
sors are not limited to certain groups; all in
one way or another are
involved in
the conduct condemned by the prophet. Yet, even if the
society as a
whole is in rebellion against God and its members sin
against one
another, might there not be some who are held particularly
accountable
before the divine tribunal for the paths that the nation has
chosen to
pursue? The following oracles will develop the tension be-
tween universal guilt and more circumscribed
responsibility.
The mention of "the land" in 4:3aa also forms an inclusio
with its
double use
in v 1. It is the land of the covenant that will suffer the effects
of the
covenant curses.20 The vocabulary of judgment reaches cosmic
dimensions in
the last line of v 3 to emphasize the awful devastation
that
awaits
through his
prophet (cf. Isa 24:1ff., 33:8-9).21 If
future blessing beyond
19 J.
20 For
a theology of the land and the importance of obedience for blessing there, see
especially W. Brueggemann, The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and
Challenge in Biblical
Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 90-129.
Unlike Brueggemann, however, I believe that
the
guilt cannot be limited almost exclusively to the leadership. Also note P. D.
Miller, Jr.,
Sin and
Judgment and the Prophets: A Stylistic and Theological Analysis (
Scholars
Press, 1982) 9-11; and D. I. Block's discussion of the relationship between a
deity
and the
land and its people against the background of the Ancient Near East, The
Gods
of the
Nations: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern National Theology (
Theological Society, 1988). For the specification of the corresponding covenant curses and
blessings here
and elsewhere, note especially Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, xxxi-xlii and ad
loc.
Not all take
the verbs in 4:3 as future. Those who understand a reference to the present
state of
affairs include Keil, The Minor Prophets,
75f.; Harper, Amos and Hosea, 251 (cf.
NASB, NIV; NRSV). Note Wolff's arguments for assuming the future, Hosea,
65f.
21 For
the idea of a cosmic dimension, the reversal of creation itself, which would
go
beyond the idea of simply the rhetorical use of such vocabulary, see M. Deroche, "The
Reversal of Creation in Hosea," VT 31 (1981) 400-409;
Hubbard, Hosea, 98.
22 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
the
judgment will mean the restoration of blessing and prosperity (cf.
itself will
bring drought and terrible loss of life. Though not made ex-
plicit in this verse, these references to the
abrogation of rain and fer-
tility could very well be an indirect attack on
other deities and the belief
in
their power in nature by the nation (cf. 2:3,5-13 [MT = 2:5, 7-15]).
In sum,
through its vocabulary and literary devices, this opening
pericope announces the accusations of Yahweh
against his people and
the
judgment that
its
proclamation of the end of the nation actually is pronouncing the
end of a
world--that is, of this people and this land. Transgression
against the
deity and thus against others in the covenant community
will mean
that
tice taken so seriously in the world of this
prophetic text. Why is the
prophetic
decree so all-consuming?
At this point a digression will prove helpful. Although the focus
of
this
article is textual and literary, insight into the prophetic complaint
can be
gained by appealing to the theoretical perspectives of the social
sciences.22 From this perspective, religion is understood as a system of
beliefs,
traditions, symbols, and rituals that work together to explain to a
people how
nature, life, and death function and why things are the way
they are.
This religious system provides an intelligible order for individ-
ual and social relationships, helps locate
social identity, and gives tran-
scendental reasons for disasters and success in
every human sphere.
Religion, in
other words, helps to establish and to maintain what people
would
consider to be the "natural order" of things.
The sociology of knowledge would label this assumed natural order
of
existence the "social construction of reality"--that is, the shared fab-
ric which is society, where a language,
socially defined roles and be-
havior, certain institutions, and a complex set
of beliefs are held in
common.
This humanly crafted "world" is held together and legitimated
in part
by religion: this social world is believed to have been estab-
lished by divine decree, to be blessed by divine
grace, and to be pro-
tected by divine promise. Participation in
religious rites is understood as
a
means of assuring the deity's favor and succor, of securing the main-
tenance of the way life "truly is" and
"should be." Moreover, the reli-
gious establishment of temple and priesthood
are a constant visible
22 For
what follows regarding the use of other disciplines, see the discussion and
bibliography in Carroll R, Contexts for Amos, 48-91, 122-35. The
theoretical issues
presented
there are then applied to the book of Amos and modern
Hosea, see
Davies, Hosea (OTG), 58-62. Cf. G. V. Smith, "The Application of
Principles
from the
Sociology of Knowledge for Understanding the Setting, Tradition and The-
ology of the Prophets," JETS 32
(1989) 145-57; and the different social science frame-
work for
R S. Hendel, "Worldmaking
in Ancient Israel," JSOT 56 (1992) 3-18.
M. Daniel
Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 23
reminder of
the supposed correctness and divine approval of this soci-
ety and its worldview.
This religious world, though, is not monolithic. To begin with, an
official
theology, cult, and religious personnel support and sanction the
status quo
for the society's leadership and institutions. At a popular
level,
however, faith might embrace this official religion as well as
move
beyond it and hold to beliefs and superstitions from other sources,
which are
accepted on the basis of experiences, folklore, and commu-
nity tradition.
This picture of religious life accords well with the phenomena
attacked by
the classical prophets. On the one hand, they decry how
religious
officials do not question the sad state of affairs in
social
construction of reality; they censure rival prophets who claim to
speak for
Yahweh, yet proclaim nothing that would criticize national
life and
how politics are pursued. The traditions of the mighty acts of
God, the
classical prophets claim, are manipulated to convince the
people and
the government of continued and unfailing divine help.
What is more, political and economic alliances with surrounding
nations
or
empires demonstrate an inadequate perception of the power of Yah-
weh and also lead to the acceptance and
support of other deities and
their
cults. In other words, the official religion has offered a distorted
Yahweh faith
and does not even limit worship to Yahweh as the only
true god
of
cult
centers and is actively involved in the official ceremonies and rit-
uals, but also follows after other deities and
celebrates at other cult cen-
ters without fear of condemnation from the
religious establishment.
What the classical prophets announce is the coming destruction of
the
social world that claims to be Yahweh's. The prophets are not just
saying that
certain aspects of national life must come to an end, but that
national life
itself is to be no more. Yahweh will need to begin all over
again in
the future, beyond the judgment. There will be no reform or
revolution to
transform the present order; the prophetic hope is of a new
and
different social construction of reality, of another "world" of
justice,
holiness, and
proper worship. Brueggemann has coined the phrase
"the
prophetic
imagination" to describe how these spokespersons judged re-
ality differently than the regimes of their
day. They declared the guilt of
the
leadership and the terrible inadequacies of national worship, while
at the
same time offering a vision of hope of a new world beyond the im-
minent disaster of the divine visitation.23
23 For
bibliographic details of some of Brueggemann's works
dealing with the imag-
ination and an interaction with his construct,
see Carroll R., Contexts for Amos
140-43.
24 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
Ultimately, what is at stake in the prophetic mind is the very
nature
of
Yahweh himself. It is not that
they do
not believe in Yahweh. The issue, rather, is what sort of Yahweh
do they
believe in and what kind of Lord is worshipped in the cult The
canonical
texts continually emphasize that the Yahweh of the prophets
is not
the Yahweh of the temples and of the masses. The Yahweh of the
prophets is
neither some sort of appendage to daily realities nor a god to
be
fashioned according to human designs. It is because Yahweh is the
sovereign
Lord, who demands to be at the very heart of individual life
and
national existence, that the prophets do not separate religious cri-
tique from the denunciation of social and
political evil. The "worlds" of
been
found deserving of severe punishment.
The Book of Hosea, therefore, asserts that the issue of religion
is
fundamental. To
evaluate religion is to get at the heart of
understanding and to touch the basis of national survival. 4:1-3
intro-
duces the primary concerns of Yahweh and
declares his judgment. What
follows in
chaps. 4-7 are more details regarding primarily the sins of
almost
exclusively the prophetic accusations. Little is said regarding the
judgment or
future hope, aspects of the divine message expounded
more
fully elsewhere in the book.
The Perversion of Worship (4:4-5:7)
The section of Hosea that extends from 4:4 to 5:7 provides the
divine
and
prophetic condemnation of the worship of the nation of
tention here will be directed primarily at
4:4-10, which serves both to
layout the
basis of the nature and guilt of this worship and to announce
the
judgment that awaits the veneration that Yahweh so deplores.
4:4-10 is a notoriously difficult passage to interpret Textual prob-
lems abound, and changes in pronouns make it
hard to specify who is
coming
under the ire of Yahweh.24 Most commentators believe that these
verses
refer to the priesthood (in the person of a particular individual
Most
recently, his concept of imagination is developed in idem, Texts Under Negotia-
tion: The Bible and Postmodern Imagination (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). Even if
one
might not
agree with some of Brueggemann's commitments and
convictions, his notion
of the
imagination is helpful and full of fresh and challenging insights.
24 H. Fisch holds that the complexity and apparent incoherence in
the language of
the Book
of Hosea voice the passions of the "covenantal discourse" of a God,
who in his
holiness
hates the state of the nation but who at the same time desperately loves his
chosen
people (Poetry with a Purpose, 138f.).
M. Daniel
Carroll R.: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 25
like the
high priest or the priests in general)25 and will suggest textual
emendations to
support a consistent interpretation along these lines.26
The Masoretic Text, however, can point to the people
throughout.27
The first thing that is important to notice are
the lexical links that
4:4-10 have with
4:1-3. Key terms reappear: "accuse, bring charges'" (the
root: byri [rib];
4:1, 4 [twice]), "knowledge" (tfaDa; 4:1, 6), and "break out,
increase"
(CrP [prs]; 4:2, 10). These verses can be taken,
therefore, as going
into more
detail regarding the accusations against the people mentioned
in the
introduction. At the same time, however, the lexical continuity is
the
vehicle for expressing a sharp contrast through a wordplay. This
contrast is
between the actions and character of Yahweh and
declares that
none can question ("contend,” the root byri) the divine accu-
sation (Yahweh's byri of 4:1), as Yahweh's evaluation of the
state of the
nation is
just.28 The people also are "like those who contend (the root byri)
with a
priest" (NASB, NIV). On the one hand, these words could mean that
tives (cf. Deut
priests
themselves will come under divine scrutiny later for several kinds
of sin?
The point is to focus on the contentious character of the people,
not on
the character of the priests of the official cult. The literary irony of
the
choice of "priest" will become more apparent in the course of the
literary
reading.
The passage continues, saying that the people will "stumble" con-
tinually ("day and night" can be taken
as a merism to denote "all the
time")
in their sin (v 5; cf. 5:5; 14:1, 9 [MT = 14:2, 10]) accompanied by
25 Note
the commentaries by Harper, Mays, Wolff, Andersen and Freedman, Stuart,
Hubbard and Davies. Because of the change to the third person plural pronoun in 4:7,
Andersen and
Freedman hold that 4:7-10 refer to the children of the priests (Hosea,
354, 358);
Hubbard agrees (Hosea, 101). The difficulty in interpretation is also
evident in
the Targum, which sees references to both the people (4:4-7, 9-10)
and the priests (4:8).
See The Targum of the Minor
Prophets, eds. K. J. Cathcart, M. Maher, M.
McNamara
(Edinburgh: or & or Clark, 1989) 14.36f.
26 The
two most important emendations are at 4:4b, which is changed to read "with
you, O
priest, is my contention" (cf.
becomes
"they exchange" (cf. NIV, NRSV). Note BHS and especially the
discussions in
Andersen and Freedman, Hosea, 344-50 and 355-58,
respectively.
27 For
this interpretation, see the commentaries by Keil and
McComiskey ad loc, as
well as M.
Deroche, "Structure and Meaning in Hosea IV
4-10; VT 33 (1983) 185-98.
28 Some
have suggested that Yahweh's (or the prophet's) discourse in 4:4a is a
response to a
complaint or an objection by a priest in the style of Amos 7:10-17. For An-
dersen and Freedman (Hosea, 345f.) and
Davies (Hosea, 117), 4:4a could be the words of
the
priest; for Mays (Hosea, 67), Stuart (Hosea-Jonah, 77), and
19), all of
the verse is from the deity; Hubbard suggests that either view is possible (Hosea,
99f.). Of
course, this point of view is intimately linked to the interpretation of 4:4-10
as
an
indictment of the priesthood.
26 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
some of
the prophets, who ideally were to be an example of holiness and
truth.29 Once again, one encounters the unexpected, but in reverse.
Whereas in
4:4 the reader at first glance wonders why the character of
the
nation is connected with the wayward priests, here the mention of
the
prophets does not seem to cohere with the other allusions to proph-
ets in the book, which are positive (6:5;
9:7-9;
the
supposed divine spokesperson accompanies the people in both guilt
and
judgment. The literary effect is to communicate a world turned
upside down
and full of contradictions.
yet will
participate in their cult; prophets (perhaps just some of them?)
can proclaim
Yahweh's message, while joining in sin. The power of the
passage is
grounded in the incoherence and the opposing images: this is
a
world bound for self-destruction, not only divine judgment.
This negative description of 4:4-5a is born out by the following
series of
pictures; the multiplication of accusations cannot but under-
line the
waywardness of the people. 4:5b-6 demonstrate a structure
of
alternating indictment and punishment in which the repetition of
the
verbs suggests a close correspondence between sin and chastise-
ment.30 The list marks its beginning and close with Yahweh's actions
against
5b I will destroy your mother 6a my people are destroyed
6ba you rejected knowledge 6bb
I will reject you
6ca you ignored the Torah 6cb
I also will ignore your
children
In addition to this structure, which shows graphically how the na-
tion is deserving of punishment, the content
of these lines also proves
(v 6): knowledge is lacking, even rejected, and the Torah is
ignored. The
totality of
use of
"mother" (v 5b; observe the parallelism between "I will destroy
your
mother" and "my people are destroyed") and "children"
(v 6cb) to
refer to
the nation.31 "Mother" and "children" form an inclusio to this se-
quence, serving as a reminder of the powerful
image of fami1y through-
29
Because of the contrast with other references to the prophets, Wolff (Hosea,
77f.)
and
Davies (Hosea, 118) see this phrase as a later gloss. Commentators who
do not excise
the
reference postulate that the criticism was directed at cult prophets (e.g., cf.
Jer 2:8,
5:31,
30 Cf.
Miller, Sin and Judgment in the Prophets, 12-14. Miller, however, takes
4:4-6
to be
speaking of the priesthood.
31 Some
who see 4:4-10 as referring to the priesthood will suggest that, along
with the
direct condemnation, the mention of the mother and children would imply a
judgment upon
three generations (cf. Amos 7:17; 1 Sam 2:27ff.). Note Mays, Hosea, 68f.;
M. Daniel
Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 27
out the
book.
[MT = 2:4, 7];
cf. Isa 50:1), where the nation is chastened and put
aside
for a
time. The mention of children also turns the reader back to those
same
chapters in which the names of the children of the prophet and
Gomer
reflect the fate of
contrast to
the character and fate of this mother and children at this time
Yahweh in
the future will restore her and her children (
[MT = 2:1,16-25]). Yahweh is a loving parent
who yearns to bring
his
child/children, back to himself (11:1-4, 8-11; 14:7-8 [MT = 14:8-9]).
4:6 also declares that
Exod
19:6, Isa 61 :5-6) among the
nations is being rescinded. Once again
the term
"priest" is utilized, and the literary play adds to the irony: the
people, who
are like those who contend with a priest (v 4), will them-
selves no
longer be Yahweh's priest. The rejection of tfaDa, with all that
this
implies, disqualifies
could also
refer to the concept of
weh at the sanctuaries and during the holy
days to offer sacrifices. The
Book of
Hosea is replete with divine accusations against false worship
both at
historic cult centers and the high places and Yahweh's rejection
of
The next pericope, 4:7-10, emphasizes
the nation's lusting after
sin.32
Prosperity33 did not yield gratitude to Yahweh, but rather the
multiplication of sin (4:7a), its devouring ("feed on") and craving
(4:8).
Thus Yahweh
will humiliate the people, by exchanging their glory as
a
successful nation for the shame of judgment (4:7b),34 and
will punish
according to
the measure of their evil deeds (4:9b). The last verse serves
as a
transition to later prophetic words.
Wolff, Hosea, 78;
metaphor,
although from a feminist perspective, see G. A Yee, “Hosea,” in The Women's
Bible Commentary, eds. C. A Newsom and S. H. Ringe
(
Knox, 1992)
198-202.
32 Deroche
suggests that 4:7-10 have a chiastic structure ("Structure, Rhetoric, and
Meaning in Hosea IV 4-10, 195).
33 Those assuming 4:4-10 to speak of the
priesthood take the “increase” in several
ways.
E.g., Wolff (Hosea, 80f.) and Hubbard
(Hosea, 102) see a reference to the
increase in
the
number of priests; Andersen and Freedman to their pride (Hosea, 354); Stuart to their
wealth (Hosea-Jonah, 78f.).
also that
at v 6 the singular MT “priest” is altered in NIV to the plural, again
injecting an
interpretation into the translation).
34 For the textual change proposed by BHS
and several commentators, see above
n 26.
If “increase” refers to national prosperity, then "glory” probably should
be taken as
its
parallel (cf. Keil, The Minor Prophets, 78; and McComiskey, The Minor Prophets, 63).
Deroche
takes the term to mean
Hosea IV
4-10; 196).4:7 is by rabbinic tradition a tiqqune sopherim, a scribal change
from “my
glory” to "their glory.”
28 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
three
chapters. The next section (
of the
nations following after other gods instead of maintaining loyalty
to
Yahweh alone, and other oracles will also use the metaphor for the
political
arena (e.g., 7:4).
At the same time, it is important to notice three theoretical
links
between
these verses and the preceding pericope (4:4-6),
which dem-
onstrate that the nation continues in view. To
begin with, there is the
mention of
the taking away of
as the
recipient of glory in 4:7. Second, the punishment corresponds to
the sin.
In 4:5b-6 this is expressed by an alternating structure, in 4:9b by
the two
statements about suffering the just consequences of the sinful
"ways" and "deeds." Third, "priest"
is used yet once more, here in the pro-
verbial comparative phrase "like people,
like priest" (4:9). Still another
facet of
the word play is added: the people, whose nature is to contest
priests and
who no longer merit the privilege of serving as priest before
God, also
set the pattern for the punishment of the priests, as the latter
are involved
in the same sort of transgressions and are incorporated into
the same
fate (notice that it is not the other way around). This juxtapo-
sition of people and priest in prophetic
condemnation also appears at 5:1
and
6:8-9.
In sum, 4:4-10 is a message directed at the entire nation. In
God's
view
These verses
paint a dark picture of the heart of the people. The sin
which
particularly deserves punishment is described in
5:1-7.
A quick look at
judgment.
Structurally it should be noticed that
an inclusio which describes the people's lack of understanding
(cf. 4:1,
6).35 Within this set of verses the prophetic word condemns
several wor-
ship
practices which reflect and perpetuate this blindness. The refer-
ence to drink that dulls the mind (
in a
cultic context (cf. 2:8, 9, 22 [MT =
consult
idols of wood (4:12; cf. Isa 44:8-20; Jer 2:2-3:9; Deut 18:9-22)
and
offer sacrifices at non-Yahwistic cult centers (
worshipped at
these places? Chapter two specifically mentions follow-
ing after the Baals,
but does this signify that the veneration of other
deities was
limited to the hilltop groves or simply that these were the
only gods
worshipped there? Is some sort of Yahweh also adored at the
high
places along with other deities? The text is neither clear nor specific.
35 Note,
e.g., J. R Lundbom, "Poetic Structure and
Prophetic Rhetoric in Hosea," VT
29 (1979)
300-308.
M. Daniel
Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 29
whoredom"
(
tic
activity is more than a passing phenomenon. Its hold goes much
deeper; it
has seductively captured the heart and mind of the nation.
But, whereas
vv 11 and 12 could very well be a metaphoric description
of the
nation deserting the proper worship of Yahweh and seeking out
other
deities or adoring Yahweh in an improper fashion, 4:13-14 do ap-
pear to
be an account of some sort of sexual perversion within the cult.
Opinions
differ over exactly what is being referred to, whether sacred
prostitution, a bridal initiation rite, general debauchery, or a combina-
tion of these activities.37
Whatever the precise charge, perversion is tied
in with
worship, and both female and male take part.38
This picture of deplorable worship continues in
is
referred to again (v 18); the harlotry language reappears (vv 15, 19);
the term
"spirit" is utilized once more to describe the grip of the false
worship that
pushes
v 17
connect back to the objects of v 12. The inability and unwillingness
to
follow the guidance of the Yahweh of the prophet and appreciate his
nurture is
underscored in
36 Whereas the Hvr, ("spirit") in
influence of
idolatry upon the nation, Andersen and Freedman see other deities in the
verse (Hosea,
365-67; 650). Hubbard does not go that far, but does use the phrase "de-
monic power" both at
37 See
the discussion and references in H. M Barstad, The Religious Polemics of
Amos:
Studies in the Preaching of Am 2, 7B-8; 4,1-13;
5,1-27; 6,4-7; 8,14 (
Brill, 1984)
17-36. Barstad does not believe that cultic prostitution
was practiced in the an-
cient Near East and suggests that Hos
other gods
(cf. Toews, Monarchy and Religious Institution
under Jeroboam 1; 162-65).
Commentators
who do hold to the practice of cultic prostitution include: Harper (Amos
and
Hosea, 261f.),
Mays (Hosea, 74f.), Stuart (Hosea-Jonah. 82f.), Hubbard (Hosea,
81f.),
Andersen and Freedman (Hosea, 157-69,370-72). Cf. Marvin H. Pope, Song of Songs
(Gar-
den
City: Doubleday, 1977) 210-29; Phillip J. King, Amos, Hosea, Micah--An Archaeo-
logical Commentary
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988) 88-107. Wolff has proposed the
idea of a
bridal initiation rite (Hosea, 14-15, 86-87) and is followed by Koch (The Proph-
ets, 80,83-85), and Hubbard (Hosea,
106). For a combination of these options, see Davies,
Hosea (OTG), 48-50.
38 Some
who understand chap. 4 as speaking of the priesthood take those men-
tioned in
dersen and Freedman, Hosea, 369f.; Hubbard, Hosea,
106).
39 Hvr, can mean both "wind" (8:7; 12:1 [Heb 12:2];
cf. 5:4).
This could be a double entendre, which describes the power of the wind/spirit.
Our reading,
in light of the proximity to
be
another reference to the "spirit of whoredom" (cf. Mays, Hosea,
79; Hubbard, Hosea,
111). Not
all commentators would agree, however. E.g., Andersen and Freedman see an
allusion to a
deity (Hosea, 376, 650). Stuart takes the reference to be to literal
destruction
(Hosea-Jonah. 86; cf. Keil,
The Minor Prophets, 84), McComiskey to the
flow of events be-
yond the
nation's control (The Minor Prophets, 73).
30 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
will
describe the nation as a dove (7:11f.,
Each of
these metaphors gives a different nuance to the character of
that the
nation cannot and will not heed its shepherd.
What is particularly striking is the mention of two historic
shrines
in
of
evil") in the midst of this diatribe against
This
prophetic word commands
wistic holy places and forbids the people to
make traditional oaths.
What
actually is being communicated? Is this a denunciation of these
cultic
centers per se? Is the problem that the kind of worship decried
in the
preceding verses is also evident at these sites? Or, is it that the
veneration at
the high places disqualifies the people from being able
to go
to the Yahwistic centers? On the other hand, what is
the Yahweh
worshipped at Gilgal and
religious
establishment and/or one of the people's making? How do
these
differ from each other and how does each match up with the god
of the
prophet? Questions abound and serve to complicate even more
the
picture of religious faith and practice in this textual world.
Although the entire nation is the target in
those who
are most directly responsible for this state of affairs? 5:1-7
could
provide the answer. The opening verse to this pericope
mentions
three
groups: the priests, the people ("house of
litical bureaucracy of the monarchy ("house
of the king"). Because 5:1
mentions two
other important sites in
Tabor,41 some commentators see that this pericope is directed at the na-
tional leadership, especially the religious
functionaries. This view could
find
support in that cultic activities are listed in vv 6 and 7.42
However,
though 5:1
does cite the leadership, this section seems to have a broader
40 Some
take "house of
85; Harper, Amos and Hosea, 268; Andersen and
Freedman, Hosea, 384; McComiskey,
The Minor Prophets, 95; Davies, Hosea, 137), others both
Hosea, 112). Our
reading accepts the former point of view. Mays (Hosea, 80f.), Wolff
(Hosea, 97f.), and Stuart (Hosea-Jonah, 91) would see the phrase as
another reference to
the
leadership.
41 The
first line of 5:2 is an interpretative crux. Many commentators would emend
the text
to create a triple accusation and a third place name (Shittim;
cf.
to
parallel the three indictments of 5:1 (cf. NRSV). Those suggesting the changes
in-
clude Harper (Amos and Hosea, 269), Wolff (Hosea, 98), Mays (Hosea,
81), Stuart
(Hosea-Jonah,
90-92), and Yair Mazor,
"Hosea 5.1-3: Between Compositional Rhetoric
and
Rhetorical Composition," JSOT 45 (1989) 115-26. Our reading retains
the MT See
Andersen and
Freedman, Hosea. 386-88.
42 E.g., Hubbard, Hosea, 112.
M. Daniel Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 31
scope. Not
only is the nation referred to in 5:1, a number of words and
phrases echo
the earlier descriptions of
example, the
reference to prostitution (v 3;
(v 4; 4:9), "do not acknowledge Yahweh" (v 4; 4:1;
cf.
whoredom"
(v 4:
in 4:9,
others in 5:1- 7 are mentioned and incorporated into the broader
population's sin and judgment.
5:1- 7 once again demonstrates that a lack of
religious zeal is not the
problem.
These verses imply worship at Yahweh cult centers, because of
the
mention of Mizpah and Tabor (5:1) and because the
nation is pic-
tured as bringing animals for sacrifice (5:6)
and celebrating the New
Moon
festival (5:7).43 Even so, the stiff-necked and self-indulgent
nature
of the
religious activity emphasized by the character traits alluded to in
the
previous paragraph make communion with Yahweh based upon
repentance
impossible ("return,” bUw [sub]; 5:4a). The prophetic invec-
tive, as in
sin
(5:3), though the nation refuses to "acknowledge" him (5:4); they
"seek" him at the sanctuaries, but he has withdrawn
himself from them
(5:6); their
cult symbolizes unfaithfulness, thus the New Moon will
destroy crop
yields and not be a celebration of divine blessing (5:7).
4:4-5:7;
therefore, is a sustained attack on religious activity in Is-
rael (with the occasional remark for
reconstruction is difficult, several impressions stand out. To begin with,
this is a
very religiously active people. The nation goes to a variety of
sanctuaries,
both those linked with the historical traditions (
as well
as the high places (
offers
sacrifices (
Yet, this
worship is censured, as it is based on blind ignorance (4:6, 11,
14, 16; 5:4)
and characterized by debauchery (
are
considered to be mere harlotry, the forsaking of Yahweh to follow
after
other gods and customs (
But, understanding the divine object of all this religiosity is
more
difficult.
Earlier chapters give notice that the nation venerates other
deities and
stance, do
these beliefs affect faith in Yahweh, at both official and popu-
lar levels? Is Yahweh worshipped solely at
the sanctuaries, or also at the
high
places? At the very least, it can be said that the nation does not ap-
pear to
see any contradiction of faith in worshipping various deities and
43 5:7b
has been interpreted in various ways, and several have suggested emenda-
tions (e.g., Wolff, Hosea, 95, who
follows LXX; cf.
tators understand Yahweh to be the subject
(Andersen and Freedman, Hosea,
396-98;
Davies,
Hosea, 144-45), a more natural grammatical reading is for New Moon (wdH) to
be the
subject.
32 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
feels that
Yahweh will be pleased with their offerings. The Yahweh of
the
prophet, however, brooks no rivals and thus announces judgment.
Sometimes
this word of chastisement is vague (4:5, 9, 14; 5:2), but in one
verse
Yahweh declares that he will withdraw and not meet them at the
cult
centers (5:6). On two occasions he says that punishment will affect
provisions and
crops (
of a
judgment of want that challenges the pretensions of the baals
(2:8-
13, 22 [MT =
tion, changing the people's comprehension to a
truer picture of Yahweh
seems
practically impossible. The spirit of whoredom has dug deep
roots (
verse
religious farce and depart.
Religion and Politics (5:8-7:16)
The long section that begins at 5:8 with a change in imagery and
a
series of imperatives and extends through chap. 7 redirects attention
from the
practice of worship to the political arena. Religion, however,
is
still a central concern, as demonstrated, for instance, by the well-
known
divine demand in 6:6 for an ethical faith. Religion signifies more
than
cultic activity; it encompasses the interweaving of that activity and
theology into
different spheres of national existence.
Even though the general scholarly consensus is that the first set
of
verses of
this section (5:8-15) has as its historical background the events
surrounding the Syro-Ephraimite War of 734-732 B.C.,44 the
particular
allusions can
be difficult to confidently identify. 5:8-11 are often under-
stood as a
reference to a counter-attack on
aftermath,45 and
powers
Assyria46 and
exact
historical setting, it is clear that the national political leaders and
44 See,
e.g., H. Donner, "The Separate States of
Judaean History,
eds. J. H. Hayes and J. M. Miller (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977) 422-
32, and J.
M. Miller and J. H. Hayes, A History of Ancient
Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, 99-101; Hubbard, Hosea, 118-20,
Davies, Hosea, 145-48. Andersen
and
Freedman are more cautious Hosea, 401-05.
45 When
taken in the context of the Syro-Ephraimite War, the
moving of the
boundary
stones (cf. Deut
prophets: The Conflict and its Background (Atlanta: Scholars, 1988) 34-37. For a
con-
trary opinion regarding this historical
reconstruction, see P. M. Arnold, "Hosea and the
Sin of Gibeah," CBQ 51
(1989) 447-60.
46
Commentators usually take bry jlm
(also at 10:6) as a title for the Assyrian mon-
arch:
"the great king" (cf.
M. Daniel
Carroll R.: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 33
the
people look to other empires, not Yahweh, when facing this major
crisis. No
matter what they might espouse about Yahweh, the experience
of the
alliances reveal a lack of faith and a limited view of God. In a
sense,
savior. On
the other hand, the turning to others exposes the nation to the
arrogance of
the superpowers and puts
pires' plans and ambitions.47 The
disfavor of Yahweh is vividly por-
trayed by two metaphors of judgment: He is like
putrefaction to both
his people
who have sought help elsewhere (
metaphor of
judgment will change: Yahweh is a hunter who entraps the
silly dove
that is
The natural flow of these initial verses to 6:6 suggests an inter-
change
between Yahweh and
nation
responds (6:1-3), and Yahweh replies (6:4-6).48 Catchwords
bind
"return,”6:1a,
5:15a), JrF (trp, "tear
to pieces; 6:1b, 5:14b), and xpr
(rp', "heal;" 6:1b,
5:13c). Yahweh has brought suffering to
unlike
and then
returns to his place until they repent, so they issue a call to
return to
Yahweh. The mimicry of Yahweh's vocabulary by
6:1-3 can
give the impression that the nation sincerely does desire, or
at
least is open, to respond to Yahweh's demands.49 A more careful
reading,
however, yields a different interpretation.
To begin with, it is important to place 6:1-3 within the broader
con-
text of
the world of the book. This is a religious nation that worships
proper name
("King Jareb," NASB [cf. LXX]) or as a name
with special prophetic
significance ("king of Yareb" with Yareb meaning "let him contend,” McComiskey,
The
Minor Prophets,
85).
47 J. L. Sicre, Los dioses
olvidados. Poder y riqueza en los profetas preexilicos
(Madrid: Cristiandad, 1979) 34-50; M. C. Lind, "Hosea
5:8-6:6," Int 38 (1984) 398-403.
Also note
the different contributions to the discussion of Israelite faith and intema-
tional relations by N. K. Gottwald,
All the Kingdoms of the Earth: Israelite Prophecy
and
International Relations in the Ancient Near East (New York: Harper & Row, 1964)
351-92;
and
Religious Institution in
48
Though some identify 6:1-3 as the prophet's speech (e.g., McComiskey,
The Mi-
nor
Prophets, 88;
Davies, Hosea, 150-52, 160), most commentators see these as repre-
senting the nation's words. LXX makes this latter
option clear by adding le<gontej to
49 So
Andersen and Freedman, Hosea, 416; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, 107; McComiskey,
The Minor
Prophets, 88;
Davies, Hosea, 150-52; J. Wingaards,
"Death and Resurrection
in
Covenantal Context (Hos VI 2)," VT 17
(1967) 226-39. Mays (Hosea, 94) and Wolff
(Hosea,
117) believe that these lines are drawn from a liturgy of repentance and are a
later
addition by redactors.
34 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
Yahweh, that
has priests who fulfill cultic obligations, and that cele-
brates traditional feast days. The mere fact,
therefore, that
mouths
proper jargon is no proof of a true commitment to change. These
lines also
do not contain any hint of repentance (contrast especially
14:1-3 [MT =
14:2-4]). Other oracles in chaps. 4-7 stridently
declare
that, no
matter what
Yahweh (4:1,
6; cf.
any
confidence that restoration automatically will follow in the manner
of
nature's rain cycles (6:2-3) is misplaced; and their return to him (6:1)
is
impossible because of rebellion (5:4;
Therefore,
6:1-3 are consistent with the picture of a religious people
who
claim Yahweh as their own but who have strayed far from his
demands and
ideals.
The ambivalence of Yahweh's reaction in 6:4 reflects the tension
between the
desire to accept the people's religious gesture and his re-
alization of its emptiness.50
Yahweh's frustration is rhetorically empha-
sized by
the double question of v 4 (cf..11:8), and the divine displeasure
is
marked by the ironic words which follow. Drawing upon the earlier
allusion to
nature's rains (6:3), Yahweh compares
mist and
dew (6:4; cf. 13;3, 14:5 [MT = 14:6]). While they expect him to
go
forth (xcy, [ys']) and appear as the dawn (6:3), he
declares that his
piercing
judgment,51 as it had done in the past through the prophets,
goes
forth (xcy)
like the light (6:5). And, instead of the self-assured
recourse to
ritual, he desires the covenant qualities ds,H, and tfaDa (6:6)
that is,
those virtues which introduce chaps. 4-7.
The desire for mercy and acknowledgment of God in 6:6 cannot be
limited to
individual ethics. 5:8-7:16 locate this requirement within the
political
sphere, and this at two levels: 5:8-15 and 7:8-13 refer partic-
ularly to international relations, whereas
6:9-7:7 allude to problems
within
suggests a
view of Yahweh within this political framework, possibly as
the
national deity at the official cult. There is then at least a formal turn-
ing to Yahweh at the cult in time of national
need. The words of the
people,
though, betray a theology that could reflect belief in the effica-
ciousness of traditional ritual and doctrinal
formulas, rather than a sub-
stantial trusting in Yahweh. In other words,
religion and Yahweh
himself are
placed at the service of the state and the status quo.
The denunciation continues in 6:7-7:7. Differences in interpreta-
tion arise over the nature of the crimes
mentioned in 6:7-11a,52 but
50 Fisch, Poetry with a Purpose, 149-57.
51 Reading "my judgment" with LXX for MT "your
judgments." See
the commen-
taries and versions.
52
Important interpretative issues in 6:7-9 include (a) the meaning of Mdxk
(k'dm) in 6:7; (b) the question as to the meaning of
the reference to "covenant" in 6:7; and
M. Daniel
Carroll R: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 35
whatever
their exact details, it is clear that violence reigns and that the
priests are
somehow involved. Lexical links to 5:1-7 suggest that the in-
volvement of the religious hierarchy in the
rebellion alluded to there is
given
greater explanation here in chap. 6. Space will only permit the
listing of
some of these connections. Note, for example: "deal falsely"
(dgB [bgd];
6:7; 5:7), the explicit condemnation of the priests (6:9; 5:1),
the
mention of a sanctuary (Shechem, 6:9; 5:1), the
defilement of
Ephraim-Israel
(
juxtaposition of Israel-Ephraim-Judah (
observations signal the interweaving of various spheres of national life
within this
textual world. Religion is not an isolated area of existence,
sanctuaries are
places of both worship and intrigue, and religious per-
sonnel are not piously removed from the harsh
realities of the struggles
of
greed and power.
The priests also could very well be involved in the political
violence
that is
described in 6:11b-7:7. There are similarities in vocabulary and
ideas
between 7:1-2 and 6:7-9, and the third person plural verbs and
suffixes in
this passage might continue the accusation of the preceding
pericope.53 7:3-7 appear to refer to a plot to assassinate the king and re-
move his
princes,54 and the passion of the protagonists of the coup is viv-
idly
depicted with the metaphor of a heated oven.55 The denunciation
(c) whether these verses refer to three separate crimes at the
three places mentioned or
to
three episodes of a single atrocity. Concerning (a): most commentators read Mdxk as
Mdxb--i.e., as reference to a place called
Adam (Josh
men" (Amos
and Hosea, 288), and McComiskey ''as Adam"
and understands the phrase
as an
allusion to Genesis 2-3 (Minor Prophets, 95; cf. idem, The Covenants
of Promise:
A Theology
of Old Testament Covenants [
The Minor Prophets, 99f.). (b) see the references in supra, n. 10. (c) Most see three sepa-
rate sins
in 6:7-9. Andersen and Freedman (Hosea, 438f.) and
Hubbard (Hosea, 128f.)
relate
these lines to the conspiracy against the throne in 7:3-7. If 6:9 is a separate
crime,
perhaps the
allusion is to priestly violence against any opposition to their status and
role
(Mays, Hosea, 101; Wolff, Hosea, 122; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah,
111f.).
53 Note
Nvx ylfp (p'ly
'wn "doers of evil," 6:8) and rqw vlfp (p'lw sqr "they do false-
hood;
7:1); dvdg (gdwd
"robber") in 6:9, 7:1. In addition, if 6:7-11a refer to the coup in
7:3-7, then
the mention of
in Pekah's conspiracy (2 Kgs
Hosea,
129, 132. Most
commentators speak in a more vague way of "conspirators."
54 The
scenario of 7:3-7 is most often taken as the coup of Hoshea
against Pekah
(2 Kgs
"The
day of our king" of 7:5 is vague and has been understood as a reference to
the
royal
coronation, the anniversary of the king's birthday, or the day of his death.
"All their
kings have
fallen" in 7:7 could be more general and include all or some of the coups
of
the
final decades of
55 See
S. M. Paul, "The Image of the Oven and the Cake in Hosea Vii 4-10," VT
18
(1968) 114-20 and the commentaries. There is disagreement on some details and
their
meaning.
E.g., Is the baker part of the metaphor or an allusion
to a particular official?
36 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
of this
tumultuous scene explains in part the text's aversion to
monarchy.56 What is of concern here, however, is not a decision regard-
ing Hosea's evaluation of the institution of
the monarchy, but rather the
relationship of politics to faith and religious practice.
On the one hand, the cult functionaries take part in the political
vio-
lence. They lead the people in the religious
ceremonies and in the con-
fessions of faith at the sanctuaries, but do not
themselves practice mercy
or
exhibit the knowledge of God.. Their involvement in the intrigue
results in
the sanctuaries and traditional centers being included in the
prophetic
condemnation. On the other hand, 6:7-7:7 confirm the nation's
refusal to
truly seek Yahweh in the midst of political turmoil and
upheaval. 7:7
ends with "and none of them calls upon me." This refusal
is
repeated in
In
another
deity.57 This final accusation at the end of this section is an echo
of
6:4-6: Yahweh would wish for repentance and trust, instead of the
misdirected and
inappropriate cries of
16 also returns
to scenes of more popular belief and practice described
in
earlier chapters.
Religion, therefore, is tied in with politics and foreign policy.
If 4:4-
5:7
condemned primarily the rituals of
popular),
5:8-7:16 concentrate on the nation's incorrect perception of
Yahweh's relationship to national decision making and politics. The dis-
cussion has demonstrated that the shared
vocabulary and themes under-
score that
these two major sections of chaps. 4-7 hit at different elements
of a
large picture of religious life and understanding. Two other links are
56 For
discussions on the book's evaluation of the monarchy,
see for instance,
A Caquot, "Osee et la Royaute," RevQ 7
(1960) 123-46; J. A. Soggin, "Profezia e Rivo-
luzione Nell'Antico Testamento: L'opera di Elia e di
Eliseo nella valutazione di Osea,"
Protestantesimo 25 (1970) 1-14; M. A Cohen, "The Prophets as
Revolutionaries: A
Sociopolitical
Analysis,” BAR 5 (1979) 12-19; Emmerson, Hosea, 105-13; Davies, Hosea
(OTG), 62-65;
L McComiskey, "Prophetic Irony in Hosea 1:4: A
Study of the Collocation
lf lqp and its Implications for the Fall of Jehu's Dynasty; JSOT 58 (1993) 93-101. The
basic
options are: opposition to the institution of the monarchy, antipathy to the turbu-
lent
politics of the North but not to the monarchy as such, and support of a Davidic
dy-
nasty
instead of the Northern monarchy. J. Pixley
contextualizes the topic to Latin
pretacion biblica latinoamericana 1 (1988) 67-86.
57 The
difficult lf xl vbvwy (yswbw
l' 'l) of 7:16a has been taken in several ways,
though all
interpretations communicate in their own way the condemnation of
religious
rebellion. E.g., BHS, Harper (Amos and Hosea, 307), and Davies (Hosea,
192)
suggest
emending to "to Baal," Wolff (Hosea, 108) to "not to
me"; Andersen and Freed-
man (Hosea,
477f.) and Hubbard (Hosea, 142) understand lf
xl as an epithet ("no
god")
for
Baal; Keil (The Minor Prophets, 110) and McComiskey (The Minor Prophets, 116)
take lf as "upward" ("they do not
turn upward," i.e., to Yahweh).
M. Daniel
Carroll R.: THE DENUNCIATION OF RELIGION 37
especially
telling. First, the arrogance of
5:5
reappears verbatim in
5:6-7)
immediately follows these words in 5:5;
is no
seeking (wqb).
This is not a contradiction. Both statements are true:
desires and
preconceived theology, but the Yahweh of the prophet
rejects this
manipulative ritual and erroneous faith. Second,
picks up
the vocabulary of 5:3. This coupling reveals that the spirit of
harlotry is
also to be found in politics (5:8-7:16) and not only in cultic
irregularities (4:4-5:7).
The accusations and condemnation are both particular and broad.
Though
certain groups, such as the priests and the political leaders are
singled out
in 5:8-7:16, it is evident that the nation stands condemned.
"Ephraim"
appears in parallel to "
in
used
repeatedly in chapter 7 (7:2, 4, 7, 10), and at least in 7:7b most
probably
refers to the entire nation; and the descriptions of stubborn-
ness and
sin echo other passages in the book. The references to the
"tribes of
(
That is,
although 5:8-7:16 focuses on the leadership more clearly and
consistently than 4:4-5:7, in both sections the tension between general
and more
circumscribed guilt and responsibility remains. The leader-
ship is
held especially accountable for the sin and resulting disasters,
but the
people are accused because they too participate in and support
this
social construction of reality. This world stands condemned to de-
struction. Yahweh himself has made them ill and
exposed their internal
rot and
silliness (5;12-13; 7:8-11); they will be devoured and carried off
(5:14; 7:9, 12-13,
16). This world which presents itself as Yahweh's and
which
comes to offer him worship can no longer continue.
Conclusion
This brief perusal of Hosea 4-7 has attempted to demonstrate the
breadth of
the comprehensive prophetic condemnation of religion in
the
textual world of this prophetic book. What is denounced is an
incorrect view
of God that is manifest in the cultic centers and feasts
(4:4-5:7),
as well as fleshed out in national politics and international
relations
(5:8-7:16). This misconstrual of the nature of Yahweh
and
the
perverse consequences are visible in all the interconnected facets
58 Some
try to distinguish between
Hubbard on
6:10-11 (Hosea, 130).
38 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
of
"world," which is the complex socio-political, cultic
and cultural entity
called
"
be
Yahweh's, yet for Yahweh, all is harlotry, hypocrisy, and defilement.
The entire
nation, and especially the religious and political leadership,
stand
charged before the prophetic tribunal as worthy of divine chas-
tisement, even abandonment by the covenant God.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
The
www.criswell.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu