Verse 1
As is the case in Matthew 24, there is a blend of several distinctive themes in this chapter. There is the personal matter of the prophet's tragic marriage, an emphatic rejection of Israel as the bride of Jehovah, and the prophecy of a new marriage, the latter appearing in strong terminology which seems to indicate God's remarriage to the old Israel, but which, in reality, is a prophecy of the New Covenant marriage of the Church as the bride of Christ. As in the mingled prophecies of Matthew 24, in which the Lord used language that was applicable partially to the three different questions regarding the destruction of the temple, the sign of his coming, and of the end of the world, in exactly the same way in this chapter, Hosea used language which is applicable first to one situation, and then to others; and it is not always easy to determine which is the primary focus of his words. Hosea 2:1 is actually a continuation of the great prophecy of Hosea 1:10,11 foretelling the gathering together of the children of Israel under "one head," the Lord Jesus Christ; but the shadow of Hosea's tragic marriage appears in the interesting play upon the three names of the children. Hosea 2:2-7 move directly into God's condemnation and rejection of Israel for the gross sins of the people, the rejection being stated (Hosea 2:2) in legal terms of a formal divorce, suggesting that Hosea actually divorced Gomer for adultery, but leaving that fact (if it was a fact) absolutely in the background, the great burden of the passage having its application to God's rejection of Israel. The reasons for this repudiation on the part of God are given throughout the chapter, but especially in Hosea 2:2-7. Hosea 2:8-13 continue the theme already introduced in Hosea 2:6, namely, that of God's persistent efforts to bring back his lost bride (Israel). In Hosea 2:14-23, God's further action to bring about a reconciliation is given (Hosea 2:14); but the whole passage phases into a prophecy of a new marriage; and, although the terminology is that pertaining to ancient fleshly Israel, the new marriage being represented as to "Israel," there is the absolute certainty that God's second marriage "to Israel" will be to the "new Israel" of the New Testament and will apply to the old Israel only in the sense that none of the fleshly children of the old Israel will be in any manner excluded from it, hence the propriety of the exact language employed by the prophet. It is the failure to discern this that has resulted in all kinds of speculations regarding some future time when God will "restore Israel to their land," etc. Nothing of that kind is actually in this chapter. Furthermore, the assignment of this chapter, or at least a major part of it, to "the eschatological events of the end-time" is also incorrect, except in the sense that the church of Jesus Christ in this present dispensation is in a sense "the last times." We view this entire chapter as a somewhat extended commentary on the entire history of God's Israel, both of them, the old and the new, with a great deal of detail regarding the apostasy of the first (old) Israel which resulted in God's divorcing them that he might be free to be married to another, as elaborated by Paul in Romans 7:1-6. It is astounding that so many of the commentators on this chapter have missed absolutely the significance of the second marriage that appears in this chapter, most of them even denying that there was any divorce, on the grounds that God sought reconciliation and not separation; but if there was no divorce, why was a second marriage necessary? All these things will be further noted in the following commentary on the text.
"Say unto your brethren, Ammi; and to your sister, Ruhamah."
This indicates a reversal of the symbolical names of judgment, as given to Hosea's children in the times of the new covenant, God's people will be "Pitied" and "My People." The use of the terms "brothers" and "sisters" in this place also points to the time of the church in the new dispensation. Jamieson interpreted this as a prophecy to be accomplished in the times foretold in Hosea 1:10,11, when they "would call one another as brothers and sisters in the family of God."[1] Polkinghorne partially misunderstood this verse, affirming that:
"It anticipates the reunion of the two kingdoms under a Davidic monarch and their return to the Promised Land."[2]
There is no promise here, or anywhere else in the Bible, that Israel, in any sense of including the northern kingdom, would ever return to the promised land; and, although it is possibly true that a very few of the scattered ten tribes might have returned to Jerusalem following the Babylonian captivity, absolutely nothing that resembles a reunion of the two kingdoms appeared in that. The "promised land" to which the true people of God will return has reference to the spiritual blessings "in Christ" and no reference whatever to any land promise. "The reunion under a Davidic monarch" refers to the calling of both Jews (of both kingdoms) and Gentiles into the kingdom of Jesus Christ the Son of David (Matthew 1:1)
Be the first to react on this!