Hosea 2:14-23

The disciplinary effects of the judgment and the future exaltation of Israel, vv.14-23.

In this section appears a very marked change in the tone of the prophet. From threats he passes abruptly to promises. To some commentators (Nowack, Marti, Harper) this abruptness seems a sufficient reason for denying these verses to Hosea. But the sufficiency of this reason is not beyond question. Judgment, according to the teaching of the prophets, has always a disciplinary purpose. In Hosea 2:6; Hosea 2:9 ff., Hosea has announced the judgment necessary to bring the people to their senses; but Jehovah still loves his faithless spouse. When he has succeeded in making her again sensitive to his influences he will once more pour upon her expressions of his love, just as the prophet did upon his wife (Hosea 3:1-3). If we have regard for the line of thought presented in chapters 1-3 (see general remarks on Hosea 2:2-23), and if we take Hosea 2:14-23, as the continuation of Hosea 2:6-13, rather than as parallel to the same, these verses find a natural interpretation. That the emphasis should be first upon the terrors of the judgment is natural in view of the sins of the people; that the prophet should point to future glory is in perfect accord with what seems to be the ordinary line of prophetic reasoning; and, far from breaking the force of the prophetic warnings, the promises would supply a very strong incentive to become worthy of the promised blessings. Moreover, an unbiased interpretation can see no contradiction between Hosea 2:14-23, and chapters 4ff., where the prophet emphasizes repentance as an essential condition of the divine favor. It goes almost without saying that the fulfillment of all Old Testament promises was dependent upon the proper attitude toward Jehovah. The verses before us touch upon one side only, namely, the part played by Jehovah. Surely it is not necessary to emphasize the condition every time a promise is made. Nor is there, as is sometimes asserted, any difference between the thought of these verses and that of chapter 3. Again, similarities with Ezekiel are not striking enough to prove the dependence of these verses upon any utterance of this exilic prophet.

The modern tendency, to regard practically all Messianic prophecies as the products of the exilic or postexilic period, is without adequate foundation. It is almost inconceivable that the pre-exilic prophets, with their lofty conception of the character of Jehovah, should have no message but that of doom. Their very conception of the righteousness of Jehovah made it impossible for them to believe that judgment could be his last word. There must be something beyond for those who remained faithful. The promises of the prophets as found in their books, including the passage before us, are no more than one should expect from men with their lofty religious conceptions. The possibility of interpolations may, indeed, not be denied, but these must be determined on other grounds than their Messianic character. Until more convincing evidence to the contrary is offered we may safely interpret these verses as coming from Hosea, and as the natural continuation of Hosea 2:6-13.