Chapter Eight

1–7. Proclamation of destruction for Israel. 8–14. Exposure of Israel’s sins.

Hosea 8:1. Put the trumpet to your lips! Like an eagle comes upon the house of the Lord, because they have broken My covenant and transgressed My law! The word is spoken in the name of Jehovah. The prophet receives the command to proclaim by trumpet to the people the coming time of calamity sent for the people’s sins. Because of the violation of the covenant, of transgression of God’s law (torah), enemies, like an eagle swooping on prey, will swoop “on the house of the Lord,” meaning on Israel, which is part of the Lord’s community. Instead of the Hebrew words “put the trumpet to your lips” the Slavonic with Greek has “into their inwards, like an impassable land” — the Slavonic text combines readings from different manuscripts; these readings apparently arose from an erroneous understanding of the Hebrew text.

Hosea 8:2. To Me they cry: “My God, we Israel know You! Calamities will make the people cry to the Lord. But in turning to God, the people say to Him: “We are Israel,” meaning they only remind God of their election and the promises they have received, but do not show true repentance for their errors. The last words of verse 2, “We are Israel,” are omitted in Greek and the Slavonic, probably accidentally, owing to the repetition of words at the beginning of the following verse.

Hosea 8:3. Israel has rejected the good; the enemy shall pursue him. Verses 3 and following represent God’s answer to the appeal of the people turning to Him. Refusing the people further mercy, Jehovah points out that Israel itself rejected (zanah — rejected with loathing) the “good” — rejected the blessing that would have been secured by faithfulness to the covenant. The end of the verse in Hebrew can be translated: “let the enemy pursue him”; the Slavonic text instead reads “they drove away the enemy,” LXX: έχύρόν κατεδίωξαν. This reading, which does not accord with the context, probably arose because the LXX vocalized irdpho (let him pursue) as irdphu instead.

Hosea 8:4. They set up kings without Me; they made princes without My knowledge; from their silver and gold they made idols for themselves, to their own destruction. The prophet names those sins for which Israel must endure punishment, namely departure from the house of David, the self-willed setting up of their own kings and princes, and the introduction of calf worship.

Hosea 8:5. Your calf, O Samaria, I reject; My anger burns against them; how long before they are clean? “Your calf has provoked (zanah) you, Samaria!” Some translations and commentators understand the verb zanah in this expression in an active sense: according to the LXX απότιψαι τόν μόσχον σου, Slavonic “crushed your calf,” Russian Synodal “your calf has cast you off,” others (Hitzig, Ewald): “He (Jehovah) rejected your calf.” But the context of the speech better suits understanding the verb zanah in verse 5 in an intransitive sense — to be abominable: your calf, Samaria, is abominable. The name of Samaria is apparently used here instead of the entire kingdom — since the existence of a golden calf in the city of Samaria is unknown. — “How long will they be incapable of purity” — to be purified of the defilement of calf worship. — The words at the end of verse 5 in the Slavonic text, “which is in Israel,” are transferred from the beginning of verse 6, and apparently instead of ki mijisrael (for he is Israel) the LXX read bisrael.

Hosea 8:6. For it is from Israel, even this calf; a craftsman made it; it is not God; the calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces! “The calf of Samaria shall be broken (schevavim) to pieces.” The Hebrew word schevavim is a hapax legomenon and is therefore understood variously. Most commentators (Rosenmuller, Gesenius), as well as Russian translators, derive it from the root schavav in the sense of to split, to shatter, to break to pieces. With this understanding, the idea is that the Samarian calf will suffer the same fate as the calf of Sinai once suffered (Exod 32:20; Deut 9:21). The LXX apparently derived Schevavim from the verb Shuv (to turn), in the Piel form — to deceive, and therefore translated the phrase διότι πλανών ήνο μόσχος σου, Slavonic “for your calf was deceiving.” According to the explanation of the blessed Jerome the word Schevavim means a spider’s web, and the prophet’s idea is that just as the wind destroys a spider’s web, so the Samarian calf will be destroyed. The Russian translation gives an idea well suited to the context.

Hosea 8:7. For they sow the wind and they shall reap the whirlwind; the grain has no ear, therefore no flour shall come from it; and if it should yield, strangers shall devour it. “For they sow the wind,” ruach; Slavonic “are wasted by the wind” (Greek ανεμόφθορα), “so they reap the whirlwind,” a figurative expression containing the idea that for their vain deeds (wind is an image of vanity and emptiness) Israel will reap only ruin and destruction (whirlwind is an image of devastation). The prophet further threatens the people with disaster and famine, but his speech has also a more general meaning: the prophet wishes to say that all the undertakings of Israel will be unsuccessful and will serve not him but his enemies.

Hosea 8:8. Israel is swallowed up; now they are among the nations like a useless vessel. Hosea 8:9. For they have gone up to Assyria, like a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers for themselves. Israel is being consumed by foreign nations. He brought this fate upon himself when he began to seek protection from the Assyrians and to secure their favor with gifts. “Like a wild donkey wandering alone:” the conjunction “like” is not in the Hebrew; according to the meaning of the original, the prophet does not compare Israel to a wild donkey but contrasts them. A wild donkey, destined for a life in the wilderness, wanders alone, guarding its freedom and as if understanding its purpose. But Israel, set apart from among the peoples, itself began to strive for communion with pagans, contrary to its calling. Thus reasonable beings departed from their path, while unreasoning creatures remained true to their calling. — The cited comparison is rendered differently in the LXX, namely ανέθαλε καθ εαυτόν Εφραίμ, Slavonic “Ephraim flourished of himself.” But all ancient translations, with the exception of Symmachus, agree with the Masoretic text.

Hosea 8:10. Although they have hired gifts to the nations, now I will gather them together, and they shall begin to be diminished under the burden of the king of princes. Verse 10 in the original is very obscure and is understood variously; the Russian translation of the verse represents only one of the interpretations. According to the meaning of the Russian text, verse 10 contains a threat to the people: despite the fact that Israel tried with gifts (ithnu) to gain the friendship of pagans, it will be “gathered” among them, gathered, as commentators add, for judgment, for destruction (ad pugnam, ad judicium subeudum, ad excidium, Knabenbauer), — sent as a captive to a pagan land. The verb kabaz (to gather), is used in Jer 12:3; Ezek 22:20; Mic 4:12; Hos 9:6 of gathering for the purpose of punishment. While in captivity, Israel will suffer or from the Hebrew (vajechelu meat) “shall begin to diminish,” to decrease in number from the burden of the king of princes. The expression melech schaim (king of princes) is equivalent to the expression melech melachim and, according to many commentators (Ewald, Hitzig, Knabenbauer), is used by the prophet of the Assyrian king (cf. Isa 10:8; Ezek 26:7). The Slavonic text of verse 10, corresponding to the Greek, gives a different idea. The reading “for this reason they will be handed over to the nations” arose because the LXX vocalized ithnu (they give) as juthnu and translated παραδοθήσονται (will be handed over). Instead of the Russian text’s words “they shall suffer from the burden of the king of princes” the Slavonic with Greek reads: “and shall rest for a moment from anointing a king and princes.” Modern commentators (Oort, Wellhausen, Nowack, Hoonacker) give preference to the Greek text and understand the passage as referring to the Israeli king and princes. In the prophet’s words there is irony: let Israel in captivity rest from those upheavals by which they so often had to anoint new kings.

Hosea 8:11. Because Ephraim has multiplied altars for sinning, altars have become to him for sinning. Instead of the words “have become to him altars for sinning” the Slavonic with Greek reads: “their beloved altars became to them for sins” (ηγαπημένα); the latter word, having no correspondence in the Hebrew text, apparently was brought in from the following verse.

Hosea 8:12. I have written to him the great things of My law, but they are considered strange to him. “I wrote for him My abundant law.” The Hebrew expression ektaiv-lo rubbej thorathi, freely rendered in the Russian translation, is translated and understood variously; rubbej thorathi more accurately should be rendered — “myriad (multitude) of My law” or, reading with Graetz (gesch. II, 1, 460) dibrej thorathi — “words of My law.” Since there were no written laws given to Israel alone, the prophet’s speech should apparently be understood as referring to the Law of Moses, which thus existed already, contrary to the assertion of negative criticism, in written form at the time of the prophet Hosea. — The Slavonic text, corresponding to the Greek, presumes a different reading of the original and gives a less clear idea. The end of the verse, “their beloved altars,” which is not in the original, is thought to have been transferred from the beginning of the following verse, erroneously read by the LXX.

Hosea 8:13. As for the sacrifices of My offerings, they sacrifice meat and eat it; the Lord does not accept them. Now I will remember their iniquity and punish their sins; they shall return to Egypt. The prophet accuses the Israelites not of offering sacrifices in general, but of the fact that these sacrifices were motivated only by the desire to satisfy their appetites, were merely feasts, the offering of meat, and not of a contrite spirit. As punishment for this negligence in God’s service, Israel, according to the prophet’s word, shall return to Egypt (cf. Deut 28:68). By mentioning Egypt, the prophet does not threaten Egyptian captivity but wishes to express the general idea of the inevitability of slavery for the people: just as the creation of the people began with Egyptian slavery, so too the restoration of the theocracy will be preceded by captivity. In the Slavonic and Greek texts, instead of the future tense “shall return to Egypt,” the past tense is read: “returned to Egypt,” which does not give a clear idea. The last words of the Slavonic-Greek text, “and in Assyria they will eat unclean food,” are not found either in the original or in other ancient translations; probably they were introduced by a later hand from Hos 9:3.

Hosea 8:14. For Israel has forgotten his Maker and built palaces, and Judah has multiplied fortified cities; but I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour his strongholds. “Israel has forgotten his Maker,” the prophet points to the source of Israel’s sins. “And built palaces,” Slavonic “built temples:” the Hebrew heichloth (“palaces”) means a large building in general and is used of palaces (Amos 8:3), of the temple of Jehovah (2 Sam 18:16), of pagan temples (Joel 3:5). The translation of heichal as a temple harmonizes with the prophet’s accusatory speech, although the understanding of heichal in the sense of a palace, accepted by many exegetes (Rosenmuller, Scholz, Nowack), does not contradict the context. — Along with Israel the prophet mentions Judah in verse 14, whose sin consisted in that, instead of hope in God, he placed his trust in fortified cities. “I will send fire upon his cities:” the prophet’s words can be understood both in a literal sense of the burning of cities (2 Sam 25:8; Jer 3:13) and in a more general sense as an indication of all the calamities that will come upon Judah’s cities. — Some modern commentators (Wellhausen, Nowack, Hoonacker) consider verse 14 to belong not to the prophet Hosea but to be a later insertion. The basis for this opinion is the observation that the end of the verse presents an expression taken from the prophet Amos (I and II), and the mention of Judah does not accord with the entire discourse, which is devoted to Israel. But similarities between the book of Hosea and the book of Amos can be observed in other passages, the authenticity of which is not disputed (Hos 4:3 – Amos 8:8; Hos 4:15 – Amos 5:7; Hos 5:7 – Amos 7:4; Hos 9:3 – Amos 7:17 and others). They are explained by the fact that Hosea was the younger contemporary of Amos and probably knew his book. Similarly, separate mentions of Judah in the discourse of a prophet of the Israelite kingdom can hardly raise doubts if one takes into account that for the prophets the true bearer of the theocratic idea was always only the Judean kingdom, to which, therefore, their thought could not fail to turn.