What book would you recommend as a solid exegetical commentary in the Book of Hosea?
You’re recommendations are appreciated!
Book of Hosea, Books (General), Commentaries
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
the archives near Emmaus 
I have a book on the minor prophets with Bruce Waltke…can’t remember its name offhand…great book though.
Thomas Edward McComiskey in Baker’s “The Minor Prophets”. I have the three volume set but I believe it has been re-published in one volume. McComiskey is also the editor of the three volumes.
I should add that Doug Stuart’s commentary in the Word Biblical Commentary series is also very worthwhile.
Ditto on Doug Stuart’s commentary. It’s great. Also David Allan Hubbard’s little Tyndale volume is good–if short and simple. Oh… and Wolff in the Hermeneia series! Great for critical analysis, especially.
I second the McComiskey recommendation. It’s a fantastic commentary.
I also use Peter Craigie’s two-volume “Twelve Prophets” set, as well. Hermeneia (Wolff) and Word Biblical Commentary (Stuart) also both have very good selections on Hosea, although Word is—of course—a bit more focused on textual criticism than exegesis.
Third the nomination:
ISBN-10: 0801062853
ISBN-13: 978-0801062858
And free is always good too, even if it is older …
(Only post-moderns believe everything needs to be modern …)
Personally I find Hosea a book about Israeliets unfaithfulness and redemption, a fascinating book, given how often it’s quoted in the NT, especially by Paul.
Yet when it is quoted in the NT (especially its application to redemption) actually bother to look back at the context of the quote, and how its applied. (What’s that witty quote that people seem to mindless parrot back about text, pretext, context …?).
The context supplied by Hosea, applied in the NT (especially by Paul) should inform our theology …
… not simply be ignored and overwritten by our presuppositions. I’m reasonably certain Paul quoted Hosea (in context), because he understood what it said.
Excellent, thank you all! By the way, if any of you have one of these commentaries nearby, would you be able to summarize how they translate and interpret 6:7? Do many exegetes think this passage echoes Adam of Genesis?
Hos 6:7 Masoretic: וְהֵמָּה כְּאָדָם עָבְרוּ בְרִית שָׁם בָּגְדוּ בִֽי׃
Hos 6:7 Septuagint: αὐτοὶ δέ εἰσιν ὡς ἄνθρωπος παραβαίνων διαθήκην ἐκεῖ κατεφρόνησέν μου
Hos 6:7 UKJV: But they like men have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me.
Hos 6:7 LEB: But like Adam, they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me.
Hos 6:7 ESV: But like Adam they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me.
Hos 6:7 ISV: But like Adam, they broke the covenant; in this they have acted deceitfully against me.
Hos 6:7 INK: ᐋᑕᒥᑐᓪᓕ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᓯᖁᒥᓚᐅᖅᐹᑦ; ᑕᕝᕙᓂᓗ ᐅᕙᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᒃᐱᕐᖕᓂᕐᖕᒥᓂᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᓐᓃᓚᐅᖅᐳᑦ.
Click on this link, wait for PDF to download and when it does go directly to page 287 (or 479 of 624) depending on your Adobe Reader/Linux Application.
But they like men have transgressed the covenant ] Israel as a whole is spoken of,* not merely the priests,f nor the prophets. Upon the whole “like men” (after the manner
of men, human-like, is to be preferred to) “like Adam” (for which are urged T and U; the fondness of Hosea for early allusions, cf. 2, 9 11 12; the other occurrences of this phrase, Jb. 3 Ps. 82, and the parallel in Rom. 5), because of
(1) G (v.s.);
(2) the absence of any account of a covenant with Adam in Genesis ;
(3) the fact, that not until P is D (mangled Hebrew) used as a proper name;
(4) this is satisfactory in sense,** viz. ordinary men, who have not had the privileges accorded to Israel. Cf. the reading “in Admah ” (v.s. ; cf. II).
Have transgressed the covenant — This does not refer to the unknown covenant between Yahweh and Israel, cf- 8; but to an ordinance (cf. 2 K. II, Je. ii 34, Jb. 3I, Ps. 105). Cf. the synonymous phrase (Mangled Hebrew) (Gn. 17, Dt. 31, Ju. 2), and the phrase “the book of the covenant,”& Ex. 24
Notice is to be taken of the following renderings :
(i) like Edom, they broke their covenant with Israel ;
(2) they are as men wrho transgressed the covenant, or who break a covenant ;
(3) they in Adam (a place) did — There they have betrayed me] There is not an
adverb of time as in Ps. 36 53*;
*** nor an allusion to the land which had received so many benefits ; nor a reference to the
ceremonial worship ; but it refers to certain localities, either unknown, or those cited in the following verses, which were the scenes of the sin designated. The utterance carried with
it “;a gesture of indignation.”
Of the 10 Hosea commentaries that I have access to here at the office and use in my work as a Bible translation consultant, my clear favorite is ICC volume by A.A. Macintosh. The recent NICOT volume by J. Andrew Dearman looks excellent, from what I can tell by the Google Books preview. The Anchor Bible volume by Andersen and Freedman is very detailed, running about 650 pages.
All three of these volumes understand “Adam” as a place name (cf. Josh 3:16), and with the prefixed preposition (ke’adam) to mean “as [in/at] Adam” or “in Adam.” (Anderson and Freedman see the same syntax in 2:5, “as in the wilderness” [kmdbr].) The adverb “there” (sham) at the beginning of the parallel line in 6:7b also suggests that the antecedent is a place name. The following verses also have place names.
Ken: Do you happen to know why some take Adam (the place) to be Edom?
Are you considering Covenant/Federal theology, Brian 😉 ?
Andrew
This book is about the upcoming punishment of the Northern Kingdom, It refers to the reasons but this is not the whole context. While Hosea is warning the Northern kingdom of their soon destruction and exile,Isaiah is comforting Judah by telling them their threats from Syria and the Northern Kingdom will no longer exist by the time the child that is conceived of the young woman reaches the age to determine right from wrong which is about 13 years old.
The writer of Romans uses this book while addressing problems concerning jewish christians not wanting to share their heritage. It was the Northern Kingdom who were exiled and spread amongst the nations and it was them that was told they are not his people . These exiles were coming back to their Elohim even though they had lost their identity as the northern tribes . The writer was just reminding the jewish christians that the Elohim will graft them back into using the saving acts of Yahshua and it will be said sometime in the future that they are again his people if they just follow the covenant that was renewed after the sacraficial aspects of it was fulfilled in the True Lamb and was ratified by the blood of the Lamb. Now I know most here hold the replacement theory but the renewed covenant is Israel’s covenant which is open to all that wants to accept the words of it. This covenant has the reward of the first resurrection while the blessing of the nations has to do with all mankind being offered grace and being included into the second resurrection where by Yahshua all mankind gets the opportunity to be judged by there own hearts .This was lost in Adam which without judgement there can be none judged righteous therefor certain eternal death..I am not claiming some special revelation ,it all clearly refered to in the bible if you truly seek it.
Roberts thanks for your response. Its not clear what you were responding to. I understand Hosea but was asking why some interpret Adam (the place) to be Edom in [Hos 6:7].
With respect to your answer – I very nearly agree with you except that when Paul and others were seeing these Israelites from the House of Israel become followers of Yeshua they were not known as ‘Jews’ – they were known biblically as ‘Greeks’ (Ἕλλην, Hellēn G1672), though the Greeks called them ‘Leuco-Syrians’ (Assyrians who had invaded Asia Minor).
The two children were metaphors for what would happen to the House of Israel:
Lo-ruhamah (no pity) represented what would happen to the House of Israel [Hos 1:6].
Lo-ammi (not my people) represented how the House of Israel would become like heathens and not recognized as Israelites [Hos 1:9] (since being his people and having Him as their God was the covenant [Exo 6:7][Lev 26:12]).
The idea that the House of Israel would not be recognized evidenced in other prophets [Jer 2:32][Lam 2:6][Eze 39:26] and become heathen [Eze 28:10][Jer 9:26] like the heathens they whored themselves to [Eze 44:7].
Even if they forgot God [Jer 2:32][Isa 57:11] God promised to remember them [Eze 16:60] and remember their sins no more (messianic) [Isa 43:25][Jer 2:2][Jer 31:34] and forge with the the House of Judah a new covenant [Jer 31:31-33] (a second marriage unlike the first).
This is the context for Pauls:
[Romans 9:25] Paul speaking of the House of Israel quoting [Hosea 2:23]
[Romans 9:26] Paul speaking of the House of Israel quoting of [Hosea 1:10]
[Romans 9:26-27] Paul speaking of the House of Israel quoting [Hosea 2:1]
[Romans 9:27-28] Paul speaking of the remnant of Jacob quoting [Isaiah 10:22-23]
[Romans 9:27] Paul speaking of all of Israel alluding to [Hosea 1:10] (NOTE keep reading on to [Hos 1:11] and compare to [Eze 37:16]!)
[Romans 9:28] Paul establishing the end of the remnant of Israel’s [Isa 10:21] punishment quoting [Isaiah 10:23]
[Romans 9:29] Paul seeing Pentecost in the booth of God’s vineyard [Isa 1:8] (recall, the vineyard of the Lord is the House of Israel [Isa 5:7]) quoting [Isaiah 1:9]
[Romans 9:33] Paul quoting [Isaiah 8:14] and [Isa 28:16] about the messiah, redeemer, Holy One of Israel as a stumbling block for many.
In Romans 9, Paul is all but interpreting OT prophecy for anyone who dares to see that the now Greek Nations of the House of Israel (falsely called capitalized ‘Gentiles’) are actually the House of Israel and the House of Judah being reforged through the death of the Messiah into the Kingdom of God, as Ezekiel as foresaw [Eze 37, particularly 37:16].
I agree they were known as greeks but the problems were with the jewish christians and the writer was bringing to rememberance the words of Hosea to call them to attention these people may be the nothern kingdom who would be brought back into the covenant in the future.
I was just expanding off your comment.
Agreed. (I’m still curious to know more about the Adam/Edom connection though).
I wish i could help you there but I am afraid there are to many possibilties as to what adam is refering to,whether a person, a people or place. Preserving Hosea was not a concern to 2nd temple judaism and stood in their way in convincing their oppressors that all the land belonged to them. but i believe there is enough still there to draw a proper conclusion that Romans does confirm
Interesting and useful list of references, thank you!
I defer to more qualified experts, but we liked the following references for Hosea:
1) Boadt, Lawrence, Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction, Paulist Press, Mahwah, NJ; 1984
2) Life Application Study Bible, New International Version, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI; 1991 (with commentary from an inter-denominational team of experts)
3) Myers, Jacob M, The Layman’s Bible Commentary, Volume 14, The Book of Hosea, The Book of Joel, the Book of Amos, the Book of Obadiah, and the Book of Jonah; John Knox Press, Richmond, VA, 1959
The contributors in the Life Application Study Bible indicate that the reference to Adam in 6:7 refers to all men. We all broke the covenant (but we are grateful that we are offered salvation and resurrection as described in chapters 13-14).
While there is no way to know for sure if adam is refering to,whether a person, a people or place, it is without a doubt it doesnt refer to all men to include those who broke the covenant after even though many of covenants are being broken today. It is most probable that this only refers to Israel or more than likely the Northern Kingdom who retained the right to be called the Nation of Israel who broke the Spoken and finger written by The Elohim covenant.
But applying it to future generations is still proper if you realize that not being chosen to be apart of THE ELOHIM’s 1000 year Sabbath is just about the same as being exiled
Ken
Thank you for pointing that out. Do any of those commentators leave open the possibility that it is double entendre of sorts?