Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Hosea 10:9 - 10:9
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
After the threatening of punishment has thus been extended in Hos 10:8, even to the utter ruin of the kingdom, the prophet returns in Hos 10:9 to the earlier times, for the purpose of exhibiting in a new form and deeply rooted sinfulness of the people, and then, under cover of an appeal to them to return to righteousness, depicting still further the time of visitation, and (in Hos 10:14, Hos 10:15) predicting with still greater clearness the destruction of the kingdom and the overthrow of the monarchy. Hos 10:9. “Since the days of Gibeah hast thou sinned, O Israel: there have they remained: the war against the sons of wickedness did not overtake them at Gibeah. Hos 10:10. According to my desire shall I chastise them; and nations will be gathered together against them, to bind them to their two transgressions.” Just as in Hos 9:9, the days of Gibeah, i.e., the days when that ruthless crime was committed at Gibeah upon the concubine of the Levite, are mentioned as a time of deep corruption; so are those days described in the present passage as the commencement of Israel's sin. For it is as obvious that מִימֵמי is not to be understood in a comparative sense, as it is that the days of Gibeah are not to be taken as referring to the choice of Saul, who sprang from Gibeah, to be their king (Chald.). The following words, שָׁם עָמָדוּ גגו, which are very difficult, and have been variously explained, do not describe the conduct of Israel in those days; for, in the first place, the statement that the war did not overtake them is by no means in harmony with this, since the other tribes avenged that crime so severely that the tribe of Benjamin was almost exterminated; and secondly, the suffix attached to תַּשִּׂיגֵם evidently refers to the same persons as that appended to אֶסֳּ'רם in Hos 9:10, i.e., to the Israelites of the ten tribes, to which Hosea foretels the coming judgment. These are therefore the subject to עָֽמְדוּ, and consequently עמד signifies to stand, to remain, to persevere (cf. Isa 47:12; Jer 32:14). There, in Gibeah, did they remain, that is to say, they persevered in the sin of Gibeah, without the war at Gibeah against the sinners overtaking them (the imperfect, in a subordinated clause, used to describe the necessary consequence; and עלוה transposed from עַוְלָה mo, like זַעֲוָה in Deu 28:25 for זֹועָה). The meaning is, that since the days of Gibeah the Israelites persist in the same sin as the Gibeahites; but whereas those sinners were punished and destroyed by the war, the ten tribes still live on in the same sin without having been destroyed by any similar war. Jehovah will now chastise them for it. בְּאַוָּתִי, in my desire, equivalent to according to my wish - an anthropomorphic description of the severity of the chastisement. וְאֶסֳּ'רם from יָסַר (according to Ewald, §139, a), with the Vav of the apodosis. The chastisement will consist in the fact, that nations will be gathered together against Israel בְּאָסְרָם, lit., at their binding, i.e., when I shall bind them. The chethib עינתם cannot well be the plural of עַיִן, because the plural עינות is not used for the eyes; and the rendering, “before their two eyes,” in the sense of “without their being able to prevent it” (Ewald), yields the unheard-of conception of binding a person before his own eyes; and, moreover, the use of שְׁתֵּי עֵינֹות instead of the simple dual would still be left unexplained. We must therefore give the preference to the keri עונת, and regard the chethib as another form, that may be accounted for from the transition of the verbs עי into עו, and עוֹנֹת as a contraction of עַוֹנֹת, since עוֹנָה cannot be shown to have either the meaning of “sorrow” (Chald., A. E.), or that of the severe labour of “tributary service.” And, moreover, neither of these meanings would give us a suitable thought; whilst the very same objection may be brought against the supposition that the doubleness of the work refers to Ephraim and Judah, which has been brought against the rendering “to bind to his furrows,” viz., that it would be non solum ineptum, sed locutionis monstrum. לִשְׁתֵּי עוֹנֹתָם, “to their two transgression” to bind them: i.e., to place them in connection with the transgressions by the punishment, so that they will be obliged to drag them along like beasts of burden. By the two transgressions we are to understand neither the two golden calves at Bethel and Daniel (Hitzig), nor unfaithfulness towards Jehovah and devotedness to idols, after Jer 2:13 (Cyr., Theod.); but their apostasy from Jehovah and the royal house of David, in accordance with Hos 3:5, where it is distinctly stated that the ultimate conversion of the nation will consist in its seeking Jehovah and David their king.