Hosea 10–11

Footnotes

1. 1 The phrase “to Baal” does not appear in the Hebrew text here, but is implied; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity. Cf. “altars for idols”; “altars of their foreign gods.”
2. 2 Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
3. 3 The referent of the 3rd person common plural verb דִּבְּרוּ (dibbéru, “they speak”) is the masculine singular noun וְהַמֶּלֶךְ (véhammelekh, “a king” in v. 3) which is used generically, representing all human kings of Israel to which the 3rd common plural verb refers. Although this is a bit syntactically awkward, it is not necessary to emend the to the 3rd masculine singular verb form דָּבַר (davar, “he speaks”) as the editors suggest. The , however, reads the singular form λαλῶν (lalōn, “uttering”).
4. 4 Heb “they speak words.” The cognate accusative construction דִּבְּרוּ דְבָרִים (dibbéru dévarim; literally, “they speak words”) is an idiom that means “they speak mere words” (so ; similar) or “they utter empty words” (so ), that is, they make empty promises (e.g., Isa 58:13; 180–181 דָּבַר 2). The immediately following collocated phrase אָלוֹת שָׁוְא (’alot shavé’, “swearing an empty oath”) confirms this nuance. The understood this idiom in the same way: λαλῶν ῥήματα προφάσειας ψευδεῖς (lalōn rhēmata prophaseias pseudeis, “speaking false professions as his words”).
5. 5 The two infinitive absolutes אָלוֹת (’alot, Qal infinitive absolute from II אָלָה, ’alah, “to swear an oath”; 46 II אָלָה) and כָּרֹת (karot, Qal infinitive absolute from כָּרַת, karat, “to make [a covenant]”; 503 כָּרַת 4), which appear without conjunctions, continue the description of the action of the preceding finite verb דִּבְּרוּ (dibbéru, Piel perfect 3rd person common plural from דָּבַר, davar, “to speak”). Although the infinitives continue the description of the action of the finite verb, they call special attention to the action of the infinitive rather than the action of the finite verb. See §35.5.2b.
6. 6 The word “empty” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied. It is supplied in the translation for clarity. Cf. “useless treaties.”
7. 7 The noun II רֹאשׁ (ro’sh) refers to a “poisonous plant” (Deut 29:17; Hos 10:4) or “bitter herb” (Ps 69:22; Lam 3:5; 912 רֹאשׁ 1; רֹאשׁ 1).
8. 8 The reads the singular construct noun שְׁכַן (shékhan, “the inhabitant [of Samaria]”), while the and reflect the plural construct noun שְׁכַנֵי (shékhane, “the inhabitants [of Samaria]”). The singular noun may be a collective referring to the population of Samaria as a whole ( 1015 שָׁכֵן; e.g., Isa 33:24). Most English translations view this as a reference to the inhabitants of the city as a whole (, , , , , , , , , ).
9. 9 The reads יָגוּרוּ (yaguru, Qal imperfect 3rd person common plural from III גוּר, gur, “to dread”; see 159 III גוּר 1). This reading is followed by most English versions but is syntactically awkward because III גוּר (“to dread”) is used nowhere else with the preposition לְ (lamed, “they are in dread for …”?). suggests reading יָנוּדוּ (yanudu, Qal imperfect 3rd person common plural from נוּד, nud, “to lament”; 626 נוּד 2.a) which harmonizes better with the parallelism with אָבַל (’aval, “to mourn”) in the following line. The verb נוּד (“to lament”) is used with the preposition לְ in the idiom “to lament for” (e.g., Isa 51:19; Jer 15:5; 16:5; 48:17; Nah 3:7). This involves simple orthographic confusion between ג (gimel) and ן (nun), as well as ר (resh) and ד (dalet) which were often confused by the scribes.
10. 10 The reads the plural לְעֶגְלוֹת (lé’eglot, “for the calves”), while some Greek versions (, Theodotion) and the reflect the singular לְעֵגֶל (“for the calf [calf idol]”). The singular reading is preferred on the basis of internal evidence: the oracle denounces the calf idol worship of Samaria. The plural form probably arose due to the ambiguity of the term “calf” when a scribe did not realize that the term was being used as a metonymy for the worship of the Egyptian calf goddess. Most recent English versions adopt the singular form and relate it to the calf goddess cult (, , , , , , , ); however, older English versions follow the plural (, ).
11. 11 See the note on the place name Beth Aven in .
12. 12 The appears to read יָגִילוּ (yagilu, “they will rejoice”; Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine plural from גִּיל, gil, “to rejoice”), but this is likely an example of semantic polarization. See F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Hosea (), . The editors propose the reading יְיֵלִילוּ (yéyelilu, “they will lament”; Hiphil imperfect 3rd person masculine plural from יָלַל, yalal, “to lament”), which also appears in Hos 7:14. If this reading is original, the textual variant may be attributed to: (1) orthographic confusion between ל (lamed) and ג (gimel), and (2) haplography or dittography of י (yod). English versions are split; some follow the (, , , ), others the proposed emendation (, , , , , ).
13. 13 This line division follows the rather than the line division suggested by the editors.
14. 14 Heb “from it” (so , ).
15. 15 The antecedent of the 3rd person masculine singular direct object pronoun אוֹתוֹ (’oto, “it”) is probably the calf idol of Beth Aven mentioned in 10:5a. This has been specified in the translation for clarity (cf. , ).
16. 16 The reads מֶלֶךְ יָרֵב (melekh yarev, “a king who contends”?) which is syntactically awkward: מֶלֶךְ (“king”) followed by יָרֵב (“let him contend!”; Qal jussive 3rd person masculine singular from רִיב, riv, “to contend”). Note that , , treat this as a proper name (“king Jareb”). The reading is probably the result of faulty word division. As the editors suggest, the original reading most likely is מַלְכִּי רָב (malki rav, “the great king”). The suffixed י (yod) on מַלְכִּי is the remnant of the old genitive ending. This is the equivalent of the Assyrian royal epithet sarru rabbu (“the great king”). See also the note on the same phrase in .
17. 17 The preposition מִן (min) functions in a causal sense specifying the logical cause: “because of” or “on account of” (e.g., Exod 2:23; Deut 7:7; Nah 3:4; 580 מִן 2.f; מִן 6).
18. 18 The meaning of the root of מֵעֲצָתוֹ (me’atsato, preposition מִן, min, + feminine singular noun עֵצָה, ’etsah, + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) is debated. There are three options: (1) “its counsel” from I עֵצָה (“counsel; advice; plan”; 420 עֵצָה; I עֵצָה 3.a); (2) “its disobedience” from II עֵצָה (“disobedience,” but the existence of this root is debated; see II עֵצָה); and (3) “its wooden idol” from III עֵצָה (“wood”; cf. Jer 6:6) referring to the wooden idol/effigy (the calf idol in 10:5), a stick of wood covered with gold ( ). The last option is favored contextually: (a) the idol is called “a stick of wood” in Hos 4:12, and (b) the calf idol (probably the referent) of the cult is mentioned in 10:5. The English versions are divided: (1) “his idol” (, ), “its wooden idols” (), “image” ( margin), “that idol” (), “this idol” (); and (2) “his own counsel” (, ), “its own counsel” (), “his plans” (), “his schemes” (), “the advice” ().
19. 19 The term נִדְמֶה (nidmeh, Niphal participle feminine singular) is derived from II דָמָה (damah; so 198 דָמָה; III דמה): “be cut off, cease to exist, be destroyed.” The Niphal form נִדְמֶה (“will be destroyed”) is paralleled by the Niphal וְנִשְׁמְדוּ (vénishmédu, “will be destroyed”) in 10:8. Several English versions nuance the literal wording for the sake of the idiom: “will float away like a twig on the surface of the waters” (), “Like a twig in a stream … will be swept away” (), “will be carried off like a chip of wood on an ocean wave” ().
20. 20 The noun II קֶצֶף (qetsef) is a (a term that occurs only once). Historically, it has been understood in two different ways: (1) “foam” (, Aquila, Symmachus) and (2) “snapped-off twig” (, Theodotion, ). Both interpretations make sense in the light of the simile. The latter has more support because of the related verb קָצַץ (qatsats, “to cut off, chop off”) used in reference to wood ( 893 קָצַץ; קצץ) and the related feminine noun קְצָפָה (qétsafah, “stump; splinter” of fig-tree; 893 קְצָפָה; קְצָפָהs). English versions differ along these lines: (1) “foam” (, , ) and (2) “chip” (, , , ), “stick” (), “twig” (, ).
21. 21 Alternately, “Aven” (, , , ) for the city name “Beth Aven.” The term “Beth” (house) does not appear in the Hebrew text here, but is implied (e.g., Hos 4:15). It is supplied in the translation for clarity.
22. 22 The reads בָּמוֹת אָוֶן (bamot ’aven, “high places of Aven”); however, several Hebrew read בָּמוֹת בֵּית אָוֶן (bamot bet ’aven, “high places of Beth Aven”). In Hos 4:15 the name בֵּית אָוֶן (“Beth Aven”; Heb “house of wickedness”) is a wordplay on “Bethel” (Heb “house of God”). It is possible that בָּמוֹת בֵּית אָוֶן (“high places of Beth Aven”) was original: בֵּית (bet, “house”) dropped out as an unintentional scribal error by haplography due to presence of the consonants בת in the preceding word במות (bamot, “high places”). Heb “high places of wickedness” (בָּמוֹת אָוֶן, bamot ’aven); so . The noun אָוֶן (“wickedness”) is an attributive genitive: “wicked high places.”
23. 23 Heb “days” (so , , , ).
24. 24 Heb “in my desire”; , “When it is my desire”; “When I am ready.”
25. 25 The reads וְאֶסֳּרֵם (vé’essorem, vav conjunction + Niphal imperfect 1st person common singular + 3rd person masculine plural suffix from אָסַר, ’asar, “to bind”). The reads παιδεῦσαι αὐτούς (paideusai autous, “to discipline them”) which reflects a of אִיסַּרֶם (’issarem, Qal imperfect 1st person common singular + 3rd person masculine plural suffix from יָסַר, yasar, “to discipline”; 416 יָסַר 3). The textual variant was caused by orthographic confusion between ו (vav) and י (yod) with metathesis of the two letters.
26. 26 Heb “Nations will be gathered together against them.”
27. 27 The verb אָסַר (’asar, “to bind”) often refers to conquered peoples being bound as prisoners ( 63 אָסַר). Here it is used figuratively to describe the Israelites being taken into exile. Cf. “to put them in bonds.”
28. 28 The Kethib is לִשְׁתֵּי עֵינֹתָם (lishte ’enotam, “for their two eyes”), while the Qere reads לִשְׁתֵּי עוֹנֹתָם (lishte ’onotam, “for their two sins”). The phrase “two sins” could refer to (1) the sinful episode at Gibeah and the subsequent war between the tribe of Benjamin and the other tribes (Judges 19–21), or (2) the entire Gibeah incident (Judges 19–21) and Israel’s subsequent failure to repent up to the time of Hosea: “the time of Gibeah” (first sin) and “there you have remained” (second sin).
29. 29 The is unintelligible: עַל־טוּב (’al-tuv, “upon a fine [thing]”?). Cf. “I passed over upon her fair neck”; “I spared her fair neck.” The editors suggest the revocalization עֹל־טוּב (’ol-tuv, “a fine yoke”), followed by many modern English versions (e.g., , , , , , ). The noun עֹל (’ol, “yoke”) also appears in 11:4 in a metaphor which compares Israel to a young heifer as well.
30. 30 Or “Judah will plow” (so ); , , “Judah must plow.”
31. 31 Or “Jacob will break up.”
32. 32 Or “righteousness” (so , , , , ); “justice.”
33. 33 The (followed by , ) reads the enigmatic בְּדַרְכְּךָ (bédarkékha, “in your own way”) which does not seem to fit the context or the parallelism with בְּרֹב גִּבּוֹרֶיךָ (bérov gibborekha, “in your multitude of warriors”). The editors suggest the original reading was בְרִכְבְּךָ (vérikhbékha, “in your chariots”), a reading followed by , . If this is correct, the textual corruption was caused by orthographic confusion between רֶכֶב (rekhev, “chariot”) and דֶּרֶך (derekh, “way”).
34. 34 The phrase “you have relied” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the parallelism in the preceding line.
35. 35 Heb “as the devastation of Shalman.” The genitive noun שַׁלְמַן (shalman, “Shalman”) functions as a subjective genitive: “as Shalman devastated [Beth Arbel].”
36. 36 For location see ; ; ; ; .
37. 37 Heb “when the dawn is cut off” or “when the day ceases.” Cf. “When the day of judgment dawns.”
38. 38 The root דָמָה (damah, “to be cut off, cease to exist, be destroyed”; 198 דָמָה; דמה) is repeated in the Hebrew text. The form נִדְמֹה (nidmoh, Niphal infinitive absolute) appears in the first colon, and the form נִדְמָה (nidmah, Niphal perfect 3rd person masculine singular) appears in the second colon. This striking repetition creates a dramatic wordplay which, for stylistic reasons, cannot be reproduced in English translations: “The moment the dawn ceases to exist (i.e., at the break of dawn), the king of Israel will cease to exist.”
39. 1 The words “like a son” are not in the Hebrew text, but are necessary to clarify what sort of love is intended (cf. also ).
40. 2 The reads בְנִי (véni, “My son”); however, the reflects בָנָיו (vanav, “his sons”). The should be retained as original here because of internal evidence; it is much more appropriate to the context.
41. 3 The reads קָרְאוּ (qar’u, “they called”; Qal perfect 3rd person common plural from קָרַא, qara’, “to call”), cf. , ; however, the and reflect כְּקָרְאִי (kéqar’i, “as I called”; preposition ךְּ (kaf) + Qal infinitive construct from קָרַא + 1st person common singular suffix). The presence of the resumptive adverb כֵּן (ken, “even so”) in the following clause supports the alternate textual tradition reflected in the and (cf. , , , , , ).
42. 4 The reads מִפְּנֵיהֶם (mippénehem, “from them”; preposition + masculine plural noun + 3rd person masculine plural suffix), so , , ; however, the and reflect an alternate Hebrew textual tradition of מִפָּנַי הֵם (mippanay hem, “they [went away] from me”; preposition + masculine plural noun + 1st person common singular suffix, followed by 3rd person masculine plural independent personal pronoun); cf. , , . The textual variant was caused simply by faulty word division.
43. 5 Or “taught Ephraim to walk” (so , , , , ). The verb תִרְגַּלְתִּי (tirgalti, “I taught [him] to walk, I led [him]”; Tiphil perfect 1st person common singular from רָגַל, ragal, “to walk”) is an unusual verb stem: the Tiphil (properly Taphel) is attested three times in Biblical Hebrew (Hos 11:3; Jer 12:5; 22:15) and once in Biblical Aramaic (Ezra 4:7; see §55.h).
44. 6 Or “that it was I who had healed them” (, similar).
45. 7 Or “humane cords” or “cords of human kindness.” The noun אָדָם (’adam) is traditionally related to I אָדָם (“man”) and translated either literally or figuratively (as a metonymy of association for humane compassion): “cords of a man” (, margin, ), “cords of human kindness” (, ), “human ties” (), “cords of compassion” (). It is better to relate it to II אָדָם (“leather”; אָדָם), as the parallelism with II אַהֲבָה (’ahavah, “leather”) suggests (see below). This homonymic root is well attested in Arabic ’adam (“skin”) and ’adim (“tanned skin; leather”). This better fits the context of 11:4 which compares Israel to a heifer: the Lord led him with leather cords, lifted the yoke from his neck, and fed him. Elsewhere, Hosea compares Israel to a stubborn cow (4:6) and harnessed heifer (10:11).
46. 8 Or “ropes of love.” The noun אַהֲבָה (’ahava) is traditionally related to I אַהֲבָה (“love”; 13 אַהֲבָה 2). This approach is adopted by most English translations: “bands of love” (, ), “bonds of love” (), “ties of love” (), “cords of love” (). However, it is probably better to derive אַהֲבָה from the homonymic root II אַהֲבָה (“leather”; II אַהֲבָה). This root is attested in Arabic and Ugaritic. It probably occurs in the description of Solomon’s sedan chair: “upholstered with purple linen, and lined with leather” (Song 3:10). This fits the context of 11:4 which compares Israel to a young heifer: the Lord led him with leather ropes, lifted the yoke from his neck, and bent down to feed him. Elsewhere, Hosea compares Israel to a stubborn cow (4:6) and a young heifer harnessed for plowing (10:11). This is supported by the parallelism with II אָדָם (’adam, “leather”; II אָדָם). Of course, this might be an example of a homonymic wordplay on both roots: “ropes of leather/love.” For discussions of II אַהֲבָה, see G. R. Driver, “Supposed Arabisms in the Old Testament,” 55 (1936): 111; G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 133; S. E. Loewenstamm, Thesaurus of the Language of the Bible, 1:39. D. Grossberg, “Canticles 3:10 in the Light of a Homeric Analogue and Biblical Poetics,” 11 (1981): 75–76. For homonymic wordplays, see W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry [], ; J. Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament, 151–55.
47. 9 Heb “And I was to them like those who lift a yoke.”
48. 10 Heb “their jaws” (so , , ).
49. 11 Heb “him.” This is regarded as a collective singular by most English versions and thus translated as a plural pronoun.
50. 12 Or “Will they not return to Egypt?” (so ). Following the and , the לֹא (lo’, “not”) should probably be read as לוֹ (lo, “to him”) and connected to the end of 11:4 rather than the beginning of 11:5. The textual confusion between לֹא and לוֹ probably reflects an unintentional scribal error due to a mistake in hearing (cf., e.g., Kethib/Qere in Ps 100:3).
51. 13 Heb “Assyria, he will be his [Israel’s] king” ( similar).
52. 14 Heb “return” (so , , , ). The root שׁוּב (shuv, “to turn, return”) appears at the beginning and ending of this verse, creating an inclusio. This repetition produces an ironic wordplay: because Israel refuses to “return” to God or “turn” from its sin, it will “return” to Egypt. The punishment fits the crime.
53. 15 The term תְלוּאִים (télu’im, Qal passive participle masculine plural from תָּלָא, tala’, “to hang”) literally means “[My people] are hung up” ( 1067 תָּלָא). The verb תָּלָא//תָּלָה (“to hang”) is often used in a concrete sense to describe hanging an item on a peg (Ps 137:2; Song 4:4; Isa 22:24; Ezek 15:3; 27:10) or the impaling of the body of an executed criminal (Gen 40:19, 22; 41:13; Deut 21:22, 23; Josh 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sam 21:12; Esth 2:23; 5:14; 6:4; 7:9, 10; 8:7; 9:13, 14, 25). It is used figuratively here to describe Israel’s moral inability to detach itself from apostasy. Several English versions capture the sense well: “My people are bent on turning away from me” (, ), “My people are determined to turn from me” (), “My people are determined to reject me” (; “desert me”), “My people persist in its defection from me” (), and “they insist on turning away from me” ().
54. 16 The 1st person common singular suffix on the noun מְשׁוּבָתִי (méshuvati; literally, “turning of me”) functions as an objective genitive: “turning away from me.”
55. 17 The meaning and syntax of the is enigmatic: וְאֶל־עַל יִקְרָאֻהוּ (vé’el-’al yiqra’uhu, “they call upwards to him”). Many English versions including , , , take the referent of “him” as the “most High.” The editors suggest reading וְאֶל־בַּעַל יִקְרָא וְהוּא (vé’el-ba’al yiqra’ vehu’, “they call to Baal, but he …”), connecting the 3rd person masculine singular independent personal pronoun וְהוּא (véhu’, “but he …”) with the following clause. The early Greek recensions (Aquila and Symmachus), as well as the Aramaic and the , vocalized עֹל (’ol) as “yoke” (as in 11:4): “they cry out because of [their] yoke” (a reading followed by ).
56. 18 The imperfect verbs in 11:8 function as imperfects of capability. See §34.1a.
57. 19 The phrase נֶהְפַּךְ עָלַי לִבִּי (nehpakh ’alay libbi) is an idiom that can be taken in two ways: (1) emotional sense: to describe a tumult of emotions, not just a clash of ideas, that are afflicting a person (Lam 1:20; הפך 1.c) and (2) volitional sense: to describe a decisive change of policy, that is, a reversal of sentiment from amity to hatred (Exod 14:5; Ps 105:25; 245 הָפַךְ 1; 3). The English versions alternate between these two: (1) emotional discomfort and tension over the prospect of destroying Israel: “mine heart is turned within me” (), “my heart recoils within me” (, ), “My heart is turned over within Me” (), “My heart is torn within me” (); and (2) volitional reversal of previous decision to totally destroy Israel: “I have had a change of heart” (), “my heart is changed within me” (), and “my heart will not let me do it!” (). Both 245 1.b and 3 suggest that the idiom describes a decisive change of heart (reversal of decision to totally destroy Israel once and for all) rather than emotional turbulence of God shifting back and forth between whether to destroy or spare Israel. This volitional nuance is supported by the modal function of the 1st person common singular imperfects in 11:8 (“I will not carry out my fierce anger … I will not destroy Ephraim … I will not come in wrath”) and by the prophetic announcement of future restoration in 11:10–11. Clearly, a dramatic reversal both in tone and in divine intention occurs between 11:5–11.
58. 20 The Niphal of כָּמַר (kamar) means “to grow warm, tender” ( 485 כָּמַר), as its use in a simile with the oven demonstrates (Lam 5:10). It is used several times to describe the arousal of the most tender affection (Gen 43:30; 1 Kgs 3:26; Hos 11:8; 485 1; כמר 1). Cf. “my compassion grows warm and tender.”
59. 21 The three imperfect verbs function as imperfects of capability, similar to the imperfects of capability in 11:8. See §34.1a.
60. 22 When the verb חָרַד (kharad, “to tremble”) is used with prepositions of direction, it denotes “to go or come trembling” ( 353 חָרַד 4; e.g., Gen 42:28; 1 Sam 13:7; 16:4; 21:2; Hos 11:10, 11). Thus, the phrase מִיָּם … וְיֶחֶרְדוּ (véyekherdu … miyyam) means “to come trembling from the west.” Cf. “shall come frightened from the west.”
61. 23 For the meaning of חָרַד (harad, “to tremble”) with prepositions of direction, see 11:10 above.
62. 24 Beginning with 11:12, the verse numbers through 12:14 in the English Bible differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (), with 11:12 = 12:1 , 12:1 = 12:2 , etc., through 12:14 = 12:15 . From 13:1 to 13:16 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.
63. 25 The phrase “has surrounded me” is not repeated in the Hebrew text here, but is implied by the parallelism in the preceding line. It is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons, smoothness, and readability.
64. 26 The verb רוּד (rud, “to roam about freely”) is used in a concrete sense to refer to someone wandering restlessly and roaming back and forth ( 923 רוּד; Judg 11:37). Here, it is used figuratively, possibly with positive connotations, as indicated by the preposition עִם (’im, “with”), to indicate accompaniment: “but Judah still goes about with God” ( רוד). Some English versions render it positively: “Judah still walks with God” (, ); “Judah is restive under God” (); “but Judah stands firm with God” (); “but Judah yet ruleth with God” (, ). Other English versions adopt the negative connotation “to wander restlessly” and nuance עִם in an adversative sense (“against”): “Judah is still rebellious against God” (), “Judah is unruly against God” (), and “the people of Judah are still rebelling against me” ().