Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Hosea 13:1 - 13:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Because Israel would not desist from its idolatry, and entirely forgot the goodness of its God, He would destroy its might and glory (Hos 13:1-8). Because it did not acknowledge the Lord as its help, its throne would be annihilated along with its capital; but this judgment would become to all that were penitent a regeneration to newness of life. Hos 13:1. “When Ephraim spake, there was terror; he exalted himself in Israel; then he offended through Baal, and died. Hos 13:2. And now they continue to sin, and make themselves molten images out of their silver, idols according to their understanding: manufacture of artists is it all: they say of them, Sacrificers of men: let them kiss calves.†In order to show how deeply Israel had fallen through its apostasy, the prophet points to the great distinction which the tribe of Ephraim formerly enjoyed among the tribes of Israel. The two clauses of Hos 13:1 cannot be so connected together as that × Ö¸×©Ö¸×‚× should be taken as a continuation of the infinitive דַּבֵּר. The emphatic ×”×•Ö¼× is irreconcilable with this. We must rather take רְתֵת (ἁπ. λεγ., in Aramaean = רֶטֶט, Jer 49:24, terror, tremor) as the apodosis to kedabbeÌ„r 'Ephraim (when Ephraim spake), like שְׂ×ֵת in Gen 4:7 : “As Ephraim spake there was terror,†i.e., men listened with fear and trembling (cf. Job 29:21). × Ö¸×©Ö¸×‚× is used intransitively, as in Nah 1:5; Psa 89:10. Ephraim, i.e., the tribe of Ephraim, “exalted itself in Israel,†- not “it was distinguished among its brethren†(Hitzig), but “it raised itself to the government.†The prophet has in his mind the attempts made by Ephraim to get the rule among the tribes, which led eventually to the secession of the ten tribes from the royal family of David, and the establishment of the kingdom of Israel by the side of that of Judah. When Ephraim had secured this, the object of its earnest endeavours, it offended through Baal; i.e., not only through the introduction of the worship of Baal in the time of Ahab (1Ki 16:31.), but even through the establishment of the worship of the calves under Jeroboam (1Ki 12:28), through which Jehovah was turned into a Baal. וַיָּמֹת, used of the state or kingdom, is equivalent to “was given up to destruction†(cf. Amo 2:2). The dying commenced with the introduction of the unlawful worship (cf. 1Ki 12:30). From this sin Ephraim (the people of the ten tribes) did not desist: they still continue to sin, and make themselves molten images, etc., contrary to the express prohibition in Lev 19:4 (cf. Exo 20:4). These words are not merely to be understood as signifying, that they added other idolatrous images in Gilgal and Beersheba to the golden calves (Amo 8:14); but they also involve their obstinate adherence to the idolatrous worship introduced by Jeroboam (compare 2Ki 17:16). ×‘Ö´Ö¼×ªÖ°×‘×•Ö¼×“Ö¸× from ×ªÖ°Ö¼×‘×•Ö¼× Ö¸×”, with the feminine termination dropped on account of the suffix (according to Ewald, §257, d; although in the note Ewald regards this formation as questionable, and doubts the correctness of the reading): “according to their understanding,†i.e., their proficiency in art.
The meaning of the second hemistich, which is very difficult, depends chiefly upon the view we take of זֹבְחֵי ×ָדָ×, viz., whether we render these words “they who sacrifice men,†as the lxx, the fathers, and many of the rabbins and Christian expositors have done; or “the sacrificers of (among) men,†as Kimchi, Bochart, Ewald, and others do, after the analogy of ×Ö¶×‘Ö°×™×•Ö¹× Öµ×™ ×Ö¸×“Ö¸× in Isa 29:19. Apart from this, however, zoÌ„bhecheÌ„ 'aÌ‚daÌ‚m cannot possibly be taken as an independent sentence, such as “they sacrifice men,†or “human sacrificers are they,†unless with the lxx we change the participle זבחי arbitrarily into the perfect זָֽבְחוּ. As the words read, they must be connected with what follows or with what precedes. But if we connect them with what follows, we fail to obtain any suitable thought, whether we render it “human sacrificers (those who sacrifice men) kiss calves,†or “the sacrificers among men kiss calves.†The former is open to the objection that human sacrifices were not offered to the calves (i.e., to Jehovah, as worshipped under the symbol of a calf), but only to Moloch, and that the worshippers of Moloch did not kiss calves. The latter, “men who offer sacrifice kiss calves,†might indeed be understood in this sense, that the prophet intended thereby to denounce the great folly, that men should worship animals; but this does not suit the preceding words ×”Öµ× ×ֹמְרִי×, and it is impossible to see in what sense they could be employed. There is no other course left, therefore, than to connect ZoÌ„bhecheÌ„ 'aÌ‚daÌ‚m with what precedes, though not in the way proposed by Ewald, viz., “even to these do sacrificers of men say.†This rendering is open to the following objections: (1) that ×”Öµ× after ×œÖ¸×”Ö¶× would have to be taken as an emphatic repetition of the pronoun, and we cannot find any satisfactory ground for this; and, (2) what is still more important, the fact that 'aÌ‚maÌ‚r would be used absolutely, in the sense of “they speak in prayer,†which, even apart from the “prayer,†cannot be sustained by any other analogous example. These difficulties vanish if we take ZoÌ„bhecheÌ„ 'aÌ‚daÌ‚m as an explanatory apposition to heÌ„m: “of them (the ‛ătsabbı̄m) they say, viz., the sacrificers from among men (i.e., men who sacrifice), Let them worship calves.†By the apposition zoÌ„bhecheÌ„ 'aÌ‚daÌ‚m, and the fact that the object ‛ăgaÌ‚lı̄m is placed first, so that it stands in immediate contrast to 'aÌ‚daÌ‚m, the absurdity of men kissing calves, i.e., worshipping them with kisses (see at 1Ki 19:18), is painted as it were before the eye.