From the Minor Prophets: Bible Studies

By William Flewelling

The Bible Studies I chose to do came about through the request from my first congregation out of Seminary. I consistently sought to present a serious, somewhat scholarly, approach to the interested among my parishioners. I would take a book in the Bible to study, assume it was written or edited to be read from the beginning, and make sense to the reader in that way. I attempted to discover for myself and my group what the book sought to convey. In this volume, I follow the studies on five of the twelve minor prophets - Hosea, Joel, Amos, Habakkuk and Malachi - each following the pattern of study I had developed.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: Nov 24, 2020
• ISBN: 9781665508926

William Flewelling

I am a retired minister from the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) living in central Illinois. Led by a request from Mildred Corwin of Manua OH when I arrived there in 1976, I long developed and led a series of bible studies there and in LaPorte IN and New Martinsville WV. These studies proved to be very feeding to me in my pastoral work and won a certain degree of following in my congregations. My first study was on 1 Peter, chosen because I knew almost nothing about the book. I now live quietly in retirement with my wife of 54 years, a pair of dogs and several cats.

Book preview

© 2020 William Flewelling. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse  11/24/2020

ISBN: 978-1-6655-0886-5 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6655-0892-6 (e)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in

this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views

expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the

views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Contents

Foreword

Notes On Hosea

Notes on Hosea 1:1 And Introduction

Notes on Hosea 1:2-9

Added Note On Parable

Notes on Hosea 1:10 – 2:1

Added Note On God’s Involvement

Notes on Hosea 2:2-15

Notes on Hosea 2:16-23

Notes on Hosea 3:1-5

Notes on Hosea 4:1-3

Notes on Hosea 4:4-19

Notes on Hosea 5:1-7

Notes on Hosea 5:8 – 7:16

Added Note: Covenant Versus Law

Notes on Hosea 8:1-14

Notes on Hosea 9:1-9

Notes on Hosea 9:10-17

Notes on Hosea 10:1-8

Notes on Hosea 10:9-15

Notes on Hosea 11:1-11

Notes on Hosea 11:12 – 12:14

Notes on Hosea 13:1-16

Notes on Hosea 14:1-8

Notes on Hosea 14: 9 and Conclusion

Hosea The Prophet: A Paradigm for Ministry

Notes On Joel

Notes on Joel 1:1-17.

Notes on Joel 1:18 – 2:17

Notes on Joel 2:18-32

Notes on Joel 3:1-21

Notes On Amos

Notes On Amos 1:1-2

Notes on Amos 1:3 – 2:3

Notes on Amos 2:4-16

Notes on Amos 3:1-8

Notes on Amos 3:9-15

Notes on Amos 4:1-13

Notes on Amos 5:1-17

Notes on Amos 5:18-27

Notes on Amos 6:1-7

Notes on Amos 6:8-14

Notes on Amos 7:1-9

Notes on Amos 7:10-17

Notes on Amos 8:1-14

Notes on Amos 9:1-6

Notes on Amos 9:7-15

Notes on Habakkuk

Notes on Habakkuk 1:1-4

Notes on Habakkuk 1:5-11

Notes on Habakkuk 1:12-17

Notes on Habakkuk 2:1-4

Notes on Habakkuk 2:5-11

Notes on Habakkuk 2:12-17

Notes on Habakkuk 2:18-20

Notes on Habakkuk 3:1-7

Notes on Habakkuk 3:8-16

Notes on Habakkuk 3:17-19

Notes On Malachi

Notes on Malachi 1:1-5

Notes on Malachi 1:6-14

Notes on Malachi 2:1-9

Notes on Malachi 2:10-12

Notes on Malachi 2:13-16

Notes on Malachi 2:17 – 3:4

Notes on Malachi 3:5-12

Notes on Malachi 3:13-18

Notes on Malachi 4:1-6

Foreword

These Bible Studies were prepared and presented to groups in my congregation – first in Mantua, OH and then in LaPorte, IN. In a sense, they all were inspired by Mildred Corwin in my first Church our of Seminary, Hilltop Christian Church in Mantua. She asked if I would lead bible studies; I agreed if I could do it my way. Mildred was game for that and was integral to that group as long as I remained in Mantua. My way amounted to doing the study at the level I had recently left behind in Seminary, dependent on the Hebrew and Greek, but not asking the attendees to do more than follow the results I found. My first Bible Study was on 1 Peter, chosen because I knew almost nothing about the book.

I have been grateful for these studies throughout my ministry as providing the mechanism for directed and intense study of the scripture. Throughout, the study was accompanied by a devotional reading of scripture through the following of the Daily Office with the regimen of Psalms and Lessons inherent in the process. I found they complemented each other for me. And I have been grateful once again as I have transcribed the notes I produced long ago in to electronic form toward the publication of my study in the discipline of a guided bible study program.

This volume carries the studies I prepared on Hosea, Joel, Amos, Habakkuk and Malachi, five of the Book of Twelve Prophets. I never found the occasion in the availability of program in the other congregations I served to hammer out the long studies that would be required to enter most of the other seven books. I have just completed transcribing the set and find myself reveling in the enjoyment and appreciation of the revisiting I have done. I can only hope that the format and the invitation might prove enticing and then satisfying for others to pursue.

I recall a class early in my Seminary career, one on Selected Psalms, in which the Professor leading our seminar class asked if any of us had any Hebrew. Only one did; and I had yet to sample that study – one which has been among the long-term most important to me. The Professor calmed our nerves by assuring us he would be using the English text, and that having Hebrew serves only to push back the frustration barrier one step, there being some other element that would open more doors for us. I agree. Here, we try to deal with what might avail us of a bit less frustration as we enter into the texts of Scripture.

I hope you find them intriguing.

William Flewelling

Notes On Hosea

[Prepared and Presented in the Fall of 1979]

***

Bibliographic References:

BDB = Brown, Francis, Driver S. R., and Briggs, Charles A., A Hebrew and English Lexicon of The Old Testament, Oxford University Press, London. 1972.

GKC = Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, edited and enlarged by E. Kautzsch, Second English Edition, revised by A.E. Cowley, Oxford University Press, London, 1974.

MT = Massoretic Text: Biblia Hebraica, edited by Rudolf Kittle, Wütemburgische Bibleanstalt Stuttgart, 1971 was used.

TDNT = Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by Gerhard Kittle and Gerhard Friedrich, nine volumes plus an index volume, of various dates. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids.

TDOT – Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, then three volumes, now fifteen, of various dates, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids

Wolff, Hans Walter, Hosea in Hermeneia – A Critical And Historical Commentary on the Bible, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1974.

Notes on Hosea 1:1 And Introduction

First, the text:

1. The word of Yahweh which came unto Hosea ben Beeri

in the days of Uzziah, Yothan, Azaz, Hezekiah,

kings of Judah,

and in the days of Yarabam ben Yoash,

king of Israel.

This winter and spring [1979], we will be studying the Book of Hosea; this is the first of twenty sessions concerning this Old Testament prophet. Tonight, we will establish our schedule, consider the first verse and cover some generalizations which will be of use later.

The Schedule:

Introduction and Hosea 1:1

Hosea 1:2-9

Hosea 1:10 – 2:1

Hosea 2:2-15

Hosea 2:16-23

Hosea 3:1-5

Hosea 4:1-3

Hosea 4:4-19

Hosea 5:1-7

Hosea 5:8 – 7:16

Hosea 8:1-14

Hosea 9:1-9

Hosea 9:10-17

Hosea 10:1-8

Hosea 10:9-15

Hosea 11:1-11

Hosea 11:12 – 12:14

Hosea 13:1-16

Hosea 14:1-8

Hosea 14:9

The prominent heading of the book, highlighted in the Hebrew construction is: debar Yahweh – Word of Yahweh. All the rest of the book stands subordinate to that heading which indicates to us the force of these statements.

Compare the opening line with that of some other prophetic books in the Bible.

The word of Yahweh which came unto Joel, son of

Pethuel

And there came the word of Yahweh unto Jonah,

son of Amittai

The word of Yahweh which came unto Micah

the Moreshite

’amaryah ben Hizqiyah

The word of Yahweh which came unto Zephaniah,

son of Amariah son of Hizquyah

The word of Yahweh unto Israel by the hand

of Malachi

Similar expressions are found in Jeremiah 1:2 and Ezekiel 1:3. Clearly, this pattern is common for the presentation of the prophet in Israelite tradition.

Among the questions with which we will have to deal eventually are:

(1) What is the consciousness of the prophet/the prophetic consciousness? How does s/he understand the position which s/he has been given? How does the prophet understand his/her self and the role with respect to God?

(2) How are we to understand prophetic inspiration?

Those questions are very big ones, very important ones. We will have to keep them in mind as we engage the text of Hosea. These will also be supplemental to the basic problems of what is immediately being said.

What we are told here is the particular prophet subsidiary to the dominant word of Yahweh, who he was and when he was active. Hosea is the son of Be’eri; but Be’eri is known only as the father of Hosea in the Bible. Whoever collected and/or finally edited the sayings of Hosea knew that Hosea was known as the son of Be’eri in his own time and country.

[Aside: we must not think that Hosea was primarily an author. Like many of the early prophets, he was primarily a speaker [which does not mean he did not write, necessarily: we have no such information]. Most likely, sayings – either written or remembered – were kept and later edited for keeping as a sacred book. Hosea did not send a manuscript to the local scribes for the equivalent of publication. That was not his concern. The final editing could have been done many years after Hosea ben Be’eri was dead: the word of Yahweh is what lived.]

Also, Hosea was active during the time of certain kings, namely:

[The dates are, of course, BCE. For an overview, we should recognize a few historical points. The Northern Kingdom, or Israel, was having political problems. The whole of Israel – both Northern Kingdom and Judea – came into being in international power vacuum at the close of the Late Bronze Age and the dawn of the Early Iron Age – the time of the Exodus and Conquest. There was a Philistine problem from along the Mediterranean Coast, peaking about the time of Saul and David [c.1050 – 950], but otherwise all conflicts were either intramural or with neighboring minor kingdoms. Egypt continued in decline throughout the period of interest, but Assyria was beginning to prowl in the North East form the mid ninth century, becoming quite militant under Tiglath-Pileser III [c.745 – 727] and his successors Shalmanezer V [727 – 722], Sargon II [722 – 705] and Sennacharib [705 – 681]. By 614, Assyria had fallen to Babylon, an ancient competitor.]

Hosea’s activity, then, is set in the turmoil leading up to the collapse of Samaria [the capital of the Northern Kingdom] and of Israel under the press of Assyria, coupled with some poor political and religious decisions. Hosea, really, was a figure set between Yahweh and Israel. The greater history mattered, but Hosea was a person suffering the word of Yahweh and engaging the situation with the word. He was a suffering agent of God.

Notice that, although he speaks to the Northern Kingdom, the Judean kings are given prominence of place in verse 1. This would suggest that these oracles traveled south to safety when Assyria ground its heel into the dust of Samaria in 722/1 BCE, and that the final editor was a Judean.

The evidence suggests that Hosea’s prophetic career began about 750 BCE and ran until there was no kingdom of Israel for the word of Yahweh to address – that is, until the fall of Samaria.

We noted a pair of questions above concerning the action of the prophet and his prophetic consciousness. Hosea does not open with a call narrative as do Jeremiah and Ezekiel; nor will we find anything like Isaiah 6 or 40, both call narratives. Such, missing entirely, will not help us. All we get tonight is the stylized statement: the debar Yahweh, the word of Yahweh, came – or simply became/was come to be = unto Hosea. That is, the word of Yahweh moved – the preposition indicates that – and it moved unto Hosea: the preposition ’el indicates motion to or direction toward the object. So, the word of Yahweh is said to move and at least can have direction to its motion. And the receiver, called a prophet, has to do something with the debar-Yahweh. What he does has to do with his prophetic consciousness. How the two, the debar-Yahweh and the prophet, interact has to do with inspiration. But we, at this point, have fairly well exhausted our material for these two questions.

Some thoughts:

(1) Our text tonight was not written by the prophet. Nor was it one of his oracles. Yet it tells us something about the way prophets were traditionally seen in their own day – or shortly thereafter. For the beginning of thinking what sort of thing – and remember it moves and may have direction in its movement – is the debar-Yahweh? [DBR – the root of debar, above – has the meanings word, matter, thing, affair – that which is spoken or spoken about.]

(2) Does the prophet of God have much to say about secular things? Or do you expect that he will? What is the separation between secular and sacred? Can the prophets clear that issue for us? [For that matter, can Jesus or even St. Paul?]

Notes on Hosea 1:2-9

First, the text:

Verses 2-3:

2. At the beginning of [this], Yahweh spoke [dibber YHWH]

by * Hosea.

And Yahweh said to Hosea:

Go! Take for yourself a wife of fornication

**

and children of fornication

for this land shall surely

commit fornication/be a harlot

from following after Yahweh.

3. And he rose and he took Gomer,

daughter of Deblayin,

and she conceived and bore [childed]

to him a son.

*    The preposition here translated ‘by’ has three basic senses, one of which must be chosen. These are [1] ‘in’ – the place, presence or state of involvement; [2] ‘at/by’ – proximity; [3[ ‘with’ – accompaniment, instrument or means, cost, cause, measure of comparison. Here, the sense of presence and instrumentality seem to compose the focus.

**    This word is a plural and indicates intensity. This has more to do with cultural attitudes toward harlotry or fornication than with anything else. As an aside, the period in which Israel became a people – under Moses and Joshua – came in the aftermath of the collapse of the earlier Late Bronze Age culture, the prevalence of pestilence, disease and warfare causing a drastic drop in population [estimates from about a 33% to roughly an 80% drop – reference lost]. The mores of family closeness and marital fidelity and the production of legitimate children became very important as cultural desiderata. The legal remnants of the day indicate that there was a shortage of women of child bearing age, a factor which places a premium on the female for economic and social support of the emerging nation. With time, the early national necessities became cultural customs and signs of faithfulness: hence, the laws.

We are dealing here with the debar Yahweh – the word of Yahweh – which came to Hosea in Israel at a very specific and difficult time in history. As we approach the text, it is important to keep these specifics in mind.

The word of Yahweh came to Hosea to do a parable – a parable being a startling story in words or deeds or both for the expression of the impact of the debar Yahweh. The debar Yahweh is spoken beHoshea‘, which we translated ‘by Hosea’. The Greek translation [LXX] is ‘in Hosea’. This indicates a certain breadth and polarity of understanding: God speaks ‘in’ the prophet and ‘toward’ the prophet. Might there be a distinction [not a separation] between speak [dibber] and word [debar] on one side and say [’amar] on the other? The prophet is concerned with the engagement with the debar-Yahweh which speaks ‘in’ him, because it has engaged him. But God is not identified with him: God is God and the prophet is a human messenger, separate from God. In Deuteronomy, for example, [and E. W. Nicholson [reference uncertain] argues that Deuteronomy was preserved in prophetic circles until – and after – the time of Josiah [c. 620] it is the name of Yahweh which Yahweh causes to dwell in the Temple, but not Yahweh himself [a vast difference, not likely to have come from priestly or royal interests]. The distinction of intensity and identity might become useful: we shall see.

The parable: pick out a likely harlot, marry her and have children by her. Notice that this parable goes against everything common to the official culture: it is a parable of God who freely chose Israel and continues to be faithfully free. The parable is not accomplished passively, but is acted: Hosea went and took to wife Gomer. [Her name comes from a root meaning to end, to come to an end, to complete, to accomplish. Such a name is a shortened name of Gemaryahu – Yahweh has accomplished [the birth]. The name, being undeveloped textually into a fancy etymology, must be original, there being no reason to expect a contrived name without the embellished explanation. It is interesting to note that, with the freely chosen harlot, Gomer, Hosea accomplished the parable of God.

verses 4-5

4. And Yahweh said unto him

Call his name Jezreel.

For, yet a little while,

And I shall visit the blood of Jezreel

Upon the house of Jehu

And I shall bring to an end the kingdom of Israel.

5. And it will be, in that day,

That I shall break in pieces the bow of Israel

In the valley of Jezreel.

The parable plays with names, particularly the names of the parabolic [and actual] children of Hosea by Gomer. The name of the firstborn son is Jezreel, which means ‘God sows’. There is a valley called Jezreel in northern Israel, a fertile plain about the city of Jezreel, home of Ahab and Jezebel [in the ninth century BCE], the place of the death of Jezebel who was eaten by dogs after a violent death [see 2 Kings 9:30-37], the place of a battle with the Philistines [1 Samuel 29:1] where Saul was defeated and died. Jehu led his bloody revolt at Jezreel [he had been anointed king by the command of Elisha, as had been commanded by Yahweh to Elijah at Sinai/Horeb] and commanded the death of Jezebel, widow of Ahab. [For the bloody excesses of Jehu – an overly zealous reformer, forming the same oppression in his own image that Jezebel had formed in hers: this is sometimes called the idolatry of the state – see 2 Kings 9 – 10]. The boy is the parable of the blood of Jezreel, a return visitation by God upon the house of Jehu. [If you read the Deuteronomic Historian’s characteristic clichés about Jehu in 2 Kings, do not apply them to Hosea: the judgment of the Jezreel bloodbath seems to be rather different here.

Notice the parallel between the House of Jehu and the kingdom of Israel. What is a king? [I have elsewhere suggested, via Coleridge, that the king is the unity of the people, the focus of the nation: truly an awesome responsibility. You are, of course open to alternatives: I do not consider anything closed – for with God, everything must be open to the Divine creative and redemptive movement.]

Hosea goes on to a statement of ‘on that day’ – which had already been established as the Day of Yahweh/the Day of the Lord: an awesome, dreadful day according to Amos, Hosea’s older contemporary. The Day is a looking forward and a making present the weight of that forwardness in the living moment at hand: the now. Some have considered this the dawning of eschatology [about the last times] – others claim that is from Ezekiel and Jeremiah – others, later yet. In the sense of the mood of drawing ends together into the means, and setting it all in the ongoing openness of God [which we shall encounter], this is blooming eschatology in the full weight of ‘here already, but not yet’.

The day of judgment, parabolically prefigured in the child by the harlot, Gomer, in a day of shattering of the bow [i.e., might, strength, defense …] of Israel. And where should this be but in Jezreel, the place of Jehu’s triumphant bloodbath?

Note that verse 5 breaks up the rhythm of the passage. That trait will indicate either emphasis or later addition. Remember that the book is put together by followers of Hosea: his interests were in the commands, which did not include ‘publish or perish’ but proclaim, forth-tell.

verses 6-7

6. And she conceived yet again and bore [childed]

a daughter.

And He said to him:

Call her name Lo’ Ruchamah * [Uncompassionated]

For yet shall I add no additional compassion

upon the house of Israel.

For I will definitely/certainly lift up for them

[i.e., withdraw from them].

7. And for the house of Judah I will have compassion

and I will deliver/save in [be] Yahweh their God.

I will not deliver them with bow and with sword

and with warfare and with horses

and with horsemen.

*    The poor child’s name comes from not/no [lo’] and a form of the root rchm [I use ch to transliterate the Hebrew letter het, a guttural h]; this latter root is interesting. The initial verbal root was lost [one is presumed due to the common structure of the language], indicating that currently known meanings stem from the noun rechem or racham – womb. The plural of intensity carries the meaning of compassion – sort of the motherly feeling or the bonded closeness among the fruit of the same womb. The verb derived from the noun means to have compassion/be compassionate – i.e., display the quality of rchm.

The parable continues: a daughter named Uncompassionated is born, for Yahweh is declaring the end of compassion for Israel. The Official God was supposed to be supportive of all things, close at hand and tenderly comforting. He was to be sort of the divine divan for the easing of any distress. But such a God was not involved. [I must expand on this in an added note soon.] The Prophet said: Yes! God is involved. God is passionate, able to care, able to weep, possessing the energy to grieve and to rejoice, to groan and to dance – God feels! But that is revolutionary stuff! [And it is also conservative with respect to the roots of living-along-with-God, proclaimed in action under the vision of Hosea – and, for that matter, of Jesus and of Paul, as well.]

The parable tells us drastically that Yahweh was going to be God and not some intellectual image/shadow called upon as if it were God. The word to Moses [Exodus 33:19] still holds: I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy [RSV]. [Note: Paul uses this text in Romans 9:15.]

In verse 7, the tone changes, giving a contrast to verse 6. It softens things, setting Judah and the Davidic monarch in contrast to Israel. The words are a later gloss, added by a Judahite, before the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BCE and possibly after the flirtation with disaster in 701 BCE, when Sennacharib of Assyria threatened the ruin of Jerusalem, but left without fighting and destroying the city. On the positive side, it does continue the theme of the activity of God.

verses 8-9.

8. And she weaned lo’ Ruhamah.

And she conceived and she bore a son.

9. And He said:

Call his name Lo’ ‘Ammi [Not-My-People]

For you [plural] are not my people

And I, I will not be/come/become for you.

[Greek LXX: and I, I-am-not for you.]

A third child, a third parable of God is presented. The first was Jezreel for the positive visiting of blood upon the bloody house of Jehu: justice did not flow down like a river – rather oppression and blood flowed rampantly. The second child is negative: Uncompassionated, the withdrawal from those already withdrawn from the free justice and compassion of God: the gifts are only and always known through participation and sharing – being-along-with-God. Now, the third parabolic child is an interesting break: Not My People. The God of Israel’s officialdom. a static, self-seeking, oppressive, rich society supported by the quiet cry of the people was but a poor caricature of Yahweh – and here Yahweh acknowledges that fact.

I have taken as a principle of interpretation the point that God/Yahweh is free to be faithful and we, too, are free to be faithful in the covenant of justice and compassion, where the fluid blessing relationship is established within a community. God is also free to acknowledge that the fact of living-along-with-God has been shattered and is in need of judgment [= being set aright]. The wrath of God flows out of His tears at being hurt by faithlessness to the vision of possibilities, the vision of ever-newness in His loving freedom – which He had already revealed! It hurts God to be ignored or, worse, to be caricatured and distorted beyond recognition. I think we will find this verified in Hosea.

Some thoughts in the excitement of Hosea.

(1) Why do you suppose that Yahweh would go to the extreme of commanding a harlot, an established whore as the class from which Hosea was to choose a bride?

(2) One of the things that may be noted about parables is that there is often a radical and disturbing and non-regular feature or pattern involved in them. They are also open-ended in that they produce a vast and imaginative and new set of divine possibilities upon the realm of stuffy actuality, thereby transforming what is into something new with God. Is that happening here?

(3) There are three children: Jezreel, Uncompassionated, Not-My People. What is the compound parable unfolding about God?

(4) Following Brueggemann [reference unclear], I am contrasting the God of the prophets from the official God of the king and the established things. The prophets as a group looked to Sinai and to the radicalness of Moses and Militant Yahwism which took its faith and society-forming power of that faith seriously for about 250 years. That contrasted that heritage with the wishy-washy convenient God of the kings and their courts. Such plops right down into our laps: how does the judgment of Hosea’s prophecy strike here?

(5) What is going on between God and His prophet? The question is that of inspiration. I have some ideas here; but you need to consider the question and think about it in interaction with the text as we see it.

Added Note On Parable

We have been calling Hosea ‘a parable of God’. For that reason, it seems of interest to look at what ‘parable’ means. [I will be drawing largely upon the article by F. Hauck, ‘ 51330.png ’ in TDNT, vol. V.]

A parable, drawn from the Greek 51327.png , related to the verb 51332.png , to set beside [says Hauck: more pointedly, ‘to throw beside each other’ – i.e., Hosea and God are thrown beside each other in the prophet’s consciousness and expression], is a rhetorical term. Here, the parable is a more or less developed comparison in which two things or processes from different fields are set side by side so that in virtue of the similarity the unknown may be elucidated by the known. That seems to be the use in secular Greek.

In the Old Testament, 51334.png translates usually mashal; so, the Hebrew mashal might help us. [1] In 1 Samuel 10:12, mashal is a popular proverb, bearing comparisons. [2] An idiom developed – hayah mashal: become a proverb – i.e., be the brunt of mocking speech. [3] The classical proverbs found in the Wisdom Tradition. [4] The extended parable [a parable not narrowed down to being something]. This opens the room a bit. [Note also that a mashal may refer to a story, to aphorisms, wise sayings, blessings, cursings, riddles – among other things: so Calvin Porter, then New Testament Professor at Christian Theological Seminary, noted; some of his evidence and reasons come next.]

In Mark 4:11ff lies the remarkable comment: To you has been given the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables; so that they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand; lest they should turn again and be forgiven. [RSV.] Verse 13 refers further to ‘all the parables’ as a point for understanding, an understanding sought by the disciples. In Mark, ‘parable’ is used nine times for the familiar story pattern, three times for other proverb-like sayings, and once for a riddle or statement with veiled meaning. Porter noted that the parables were cryptic, deliberately enigmatic/problematic forms of speech or patterns of action. And, we might add, the two may be combined: words and actions together, not just speech or mime.

This leaves us with the possibility of mixed words and actions setting forth a way of being/living. And these will be cryptic in form and deliberately enigmatic in action: they create tension, creative tension, unbearable tension from which one/the audience/the ones being drawn into the clash will either draw back into the old and familiar or be driven forward through the parable into the creativity of living-along-with-God.

Cryptic means secret or hidden. Hence, a cryptic saying is one which is hidden yet peeking out of the shadows, hauntingly alluring, raising the hints of mystery being extended – from us to God, from God to us. Of such was Jesus a master. The claim that the parables are immediately obvious and clear little illustrations, of the kind rampant from modern pulpits is wrong; they appear clear and nice to those who have drawn back from encountering them. This comes to us as an inheritance from the least visionary moments of the Church’s tradition. As ingrained, it requires a struggle to overcome. From a distance, Jesus looks nice; up close he is dangerously powerful, flashingly alive. The Song of Solomon speaks of the love between a man and a woman – and does so with rare beauty; look at 8:6: ‘Set me as a seal upon your heart,/ as a seal upon your arm;/ for love is strong as death,/ jealousy is cruel as he grace./ Its flashes are flashes of fire,/ a most vehement flame.’ [RSV] The last line is literally ‘flames of Ya’ or ‘Yahweh flames’ That is the power of divine love – in Jesus, hidden in parables; in Hosea, peeking out in the parable of God.

Notes on Hosea 1:10 – 2:1

At the eve of Hosea’s ministry, we see him established as a parable of God – and his harlotrous wife and their children with him. It is important to remember that Hosea is a living parable and, as such, engages God with people in ways often uncomfortable to the people but always alive to the freeing power of God. We often have the tendency to move quickly in applying the scripture to our lives, that is, to ourselves, narrowly understood. The parable of God is a whole which invites us to enter imaginatively and a lively into it. Let us try to avoid the pestilence of jumping from the text, permitting rather the text to involve us in itself, in its ideas, in its God. Great thoughts open up that way; and Hosea has great thoughts for us to share along with him and God and each other.

Patience, says Coleridge, never hurries and never pauses.

Verse 10

10. And the number of the sons of Israel

shall be as the sand of the sea

which may not be measured

and may not be counted.

And it shall be in the place

where was said to them:

Not-My-People are you [plural]

shall be said to them:

Sons of the living God/Sons of God of the living.

RSV opens with ‘Yet the number …’, suggesting that this is a continuation of the preceding narrative. The problem is that neither are narratives; in the prophets, there are pieces of prophetic episodes or oracles strung together like pearls on a string: the pearls are important, the string a convenience. Like jewelers, we need to find and view the pearls, born of the theology-in-action of the Prophets encountering God and the available culture with a violent clash, feeling deeply the pangs of both sides. Here, the "and’ may be omitted as untranslatable, being a Hebrew stylistic device: it is necessary [with an adversative sense] if you wish to see it connected to verses 2-9 very closely.

Here, Hosea picks up an old, old saying from Israel’s national tradition. Out of Genesis 22:17, we find the promise to Abraham that his descendants of promise [via Isaac – the laughing one] shall be as ‘the sand which [is] upon the shores of the sea’ [Also: Genesis 32:12 [of Jacob]; 41:49 [of Joseph’s grain in Egypt]; also see Joshua 11:4; Judges 7:12; 1 Samuel 13:35; 2 Samuel 17:11; 1 Kings 4:20; 5:9.] Hosea reaffirms the promise of God: whatever may happen with individuals and with groups and even with Israel as a nation, the children of Israel shall continue, as God promised to Abraham and to his posterity forever. God remains faithful: that is the grounding fact of this little oracle of salvation.

Hosea’s oracle of salvation picks up again his children’s names, beginning with the youngest [Lo’ ‘ammi]. Here, where was said parabolically to Israel: ‘You are Not-My-People’, it shall be said to them ‘Sons/Children of the living God’. What is the power of prophetic pronouncement? Of what force are any words, particularly kind or pointedly poking words? [We handle these words quite cavalierly, jousting in seeming jest with the poisoned rapiers of rancid ‘wit’. Words and speech should be respected for the immense power which they possess – for both good and evil.] Hosea leaves little room to doubt that the pronouncement opens up the fact, both of the place of ‘Not-My-People’ and ‘Sons-of-the-living-God’. [Notice that the deception/untruth – a negation of the being, of the life force of the speaker – is not here considered. The word of truth spoken creates a real world; the word of untruth spoken also creates a real world – but this one is sort of an anti-world of distorted dimensions, foreclosed spaces, removed from God into the realm of fantasy, artificially constructed, a construct of make-believe isolated from the sobering ecstasy of the truth of God. In any statement about the power of words, deceit is a problem – as is the Destroyer it represents in power.]

The phrase ‘living God’ is Hosea’s own, and Hosea should have the opportunity to explain it. Here, it is contrasted in ‘Sons of the living God/God of the living’ against ‘Not-My-People’, perhaps as a reestablishment of/as ‘My-People’ [see on 2:1, below]. Is Yahweh ’el chay because this God brings to life, hence making this description the action of God?

Verse 11:

11. And the sons of Judah shall be gathered together

and the sons of Israel, together.

And they shall set for themselves

one head.

And they shall arise from the land,

for great is the day

of Jezreel.

At first we might notice the presence of the passive voice: in verse 10 we found ‘be measured’, ‘be counted’, ‘be said’ – this last curiously circumvents the Divine pronouncement; and here we find ‘be gathered’. The oracle of salvation normally comes more forcefully, in active voice and first person – ‘I said’; ‘I will gather’ – as the action of Yahweh. The effect is to make this a ‘soft’ oracle of salvation: passive constructions serve to give a marshmallow effect in that they do not strike with brilliant sharpness the lives of the people, yet casually suggests another side of the radical judgment inherent in ‘Not-My-People’.

Remember that, by the time of Hosea [and perhaps, as some scholars would argue, forever] there is a distinction between ‘Israel’ and ‘Judah’: Judah is the Southern Kingdom, ruled by the house of David, heir of the royal theology and possessor of the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem: Israel is the Northern Kingdom, the now-lost ten tribes, a different nation, a brother-nation to Judah in which Ephraim was the dominant tribe. [The small remnant which survived the disaster of 722/1 formed the nucleus of the Samaritans – who still exist today, living quietly about Mt. Gerezim.] The oracle of salvation speaks of gathering these two nations together [as under the Judges, and even the monarchy through Solomon] with one head/chief [the word is for a prominent leader [r’osh] – not a prince [nagid] nor king [melek]: is this a view back to the pre-monarchical days, to the days of the Judges who ruled as chiefs and as ones setting things right in Israel, and to the era of militant Mosaic Yahwism? is this a view back and forward, back to Sinai, forward through the creating covenant [as opposed to constraining law] – for a faithful people [withness] with God [‘am ’ameth ‘im Yahweh]? This is the kind of radical conservatism which rang out the Newness-acting God from the exodus on through the present [drawing also upon the patriarchal traditions], a character of the prophets – and of Jesus and Paul and others possessed of spiritual intensity along-with-God.

And Jezreel enters again. Recall all that was said of Jezreel last week: there, in the place called ‘God Sowed’, many fell under the wrath of Jehu, son of Nimshi. This time, we have the great day of Jezreel; recall that our previous reference to day – the day of judgment – dealt with Jezreel [1:5 – ‘and it will be, in that day/ that I will shatter the bow of Jezreel]. Hosea sets here some ambivalence about ‘that day’; could there be, perhaps, a joining of judgment – shattering of bow, of power [of self-sufficiency?] – and of salvation – a gathering of the children of Judah and of Israel under one head, and their rising from the land [mostly a geographical term, not like earth/soil/ground, not a resurrection from the blood-bath of Jehu]. Could that one head [r’osh ’echad – compare the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 – shema‘ Yisra’el YHWH ‘elohenu YHWH ’echad] be Yahweh ? Notice that the one head is set for/to themselves by the people. Is this/could this be their move again into the creating covenant with Yahweh as head?

Verse 2:1

1. Say to your [plural] brothers:

My People [‘ammi]

and to your [plural] sisters:

Compassionated [Ruchamah].

The name change is significant: making positive that which was negative. Thus is the command of salvation. It is a command to speak: Say to your brother, and to your sisters. The span of kin is spread: Lo‘ ‘ammi becomes the unity of the sons of Israel, bearing with them, as a focus, the turning they own – and more – in remaining unto salvation. Lo’ ‘ammi becomes Bene ’elohim chai [Sons of the living God] and ‘ammi [My People: My ‘withness’, which identifies a people – one’s people are those with whom one shares withness in any form, particularly that of relationship-along-with-God]. The daughter, likewise, is the unity of the daughters of Israel, bearing in herself the truth of Lo’ Ruchamah for and with them all. And now the Lo’ is dropped off in the declaration through the parabolic figure to all the sisters.

Aside: the English words Parable and Parabola come from the Latin parabola and the Greek 51336.png . Both take the adjectival form parabolic. Do the properties of a parabola suggest anything about the action of a parable? It is, at least, an interesting thought.

The question flows forth, not yet to be determined but to be posed: How broad is the kinship? Does it lie within the faithfulness to the creative covenant of God? [Cf. Mark 3:31-35 for a position of Jesus on this issue.]

Some thoughts:

(1) We said that Hosea is a living parable. Can this be true of anyone in ministry? Then, how about the Protestant insistence [correctly so] that all Christians are, de facto, ministers?

(2) What seems to be Hosea’s sense of My-People? Is this different than the ordinary way we deal with a people? after all, people seems to be quite anonymous to us due to the fact that we are accustomed to thinking of individuals first and any group association second. What is the importance of being a people? and, more pointedly, of being My-People? and not Not-My-People?

(3) Is there any sense in which we are all parabolic foci for the people, our people? That would suggest that each of us bears mutual responsibility for all kin. And then, we hear again that question to Jesus: who is my neighbor?

(4) From the little taste we have had so far, what is Hosea’s God like? And how does that God relate with God’s people Israel? And with the Prophet, Hosea? And all with each other?

Added Note On God’s Involvement

In the notes on Hosea 1:6, I made the comment: "The Official God was supposed to be supportive of all things, close at hand and tenderly comforting. He was to be sort of the divine divan for the easing of any distress. But God was not