For this is even from Israel! The workman made it, and it is no God; indeed, the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces.
Parallel Translations
-
For this is even from Israel! The workman made it, and it is no God; indeed, the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces.
-
For from Israel was it also: the workman made it; therefore it is not God: but the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces.
-
For from Israel is even this: the craftsman made it, and it is no God; yea, the calf of Samaria shall be broken in shivers.
Cross-references (17)
Passages linked to Hosea 8:6 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Habakkuk 2:18 “What value does the engraved image have, that its maker has engraved it; the molten image, even the teacher of lies, that he who fashions its form trusts in it, to make mute idols?
- 2 Kings 23:15 Moreover the altar that was at Bethel, and the high place which Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin, had made, even that altar and the high place he broke down; and he burned the high place and beat it to dust, and burned the Asherah.
- 2 Kings 23:19 All the houses also of the high places that were in the cities of Samaria, which the kings of Israel had made to provoke Yahweh to anger, Josiah took away, and did to them according to all the acts that he had done in Bethel.
- 2 Chronicles 31:1 Now when all this was finished, all Israel who were present went out to the cities of Judah, and broke the pillars in pieces, cut down the Asherah poles, and broke down the high places and the altars out of all Judah and Benjamin, also in Ephraim and Manasseh, until they had destroyed them all. Then all the children of Israel returned, every man to his possession, into their own cities.
- 2 Chronicles 34:6-7 He did this in the cities of Manasseh, Ephraim, and Simeon, even to Naphtali, around in their ruins. He broke down the altars, and beat the Asherah poles and the engraved images into powder, and cut down all the incense altars throughout all the land of Israel, then returned to Jerusalem.
- Psalms 106:19-20 They made a calf in Horeb, and worshiped a molten image. Thus they exchanged their glory for an image of a bull that eats grass.
- Psalms 115:4-8 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but they don’t speak. They have eyes, but they don’t see. They have ears, but they don’t hear. They have noses, but they don’t smell. They have hands, but they don’t feel. They have feet, but they don’t walk, neither do they speak through their throat. Those who make them will be like them; yes, everyone who trusts in them.
- Psalms 135:15-18 The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but they can’t speak. They have eyes, but they can’t see. They have ears, but they can’t hear, neither is there any breath in their mouths. Those who make them will be like them, yes, everyone who trusts in them.
- Isaiah 44:9-20 Everyone who makes a carved image is vain. The things that they delight in will not profit. Their own witnesses don’t see, nor know, that they may be disappointed. Who has fashioned a god, or molds an image that is profitable for nothing? Behold, all his fellows will be disappointed; and the workmen are mere men. Let them all be gathered together. Let them stand up. They will fear. They will be put to shame together. The blacksmith takes an ax, works in the coals, fashions it with hammers, and works it with his strong arm. He is hungry, and his strength fails; he drinks no water, and is faint. The carpenter stretches out a line. He marks it out with a pencil. He shapes it with planes. He marks it out with compasses, and shapes it like the figure of a man, with the beauty of a man, to reside in a house. He cuts down cedars for himself, and takes the cypress and the oak, and strengthens for himself one among the trees of the forest. He plants a cypress tree, and the rain nourishes it. Then it will be for a man to burn; and he takes some of it, and warms himself. Yes, he burns it, and bakes bread. Yes, he makes a god, and worships it; he makes it a carved image, and falls down to it. He burns part of it in the fire. With part of it, he eats meat. He roasts a roast, and is satisfied. Yes, he warms himself, and says, “Aha! I am warm. I have seen the fire.” The rest of it he makes into a god, even his engraved image. He bows down to it and worships, and prays to it, and says, “Deliver me; for you are my god!” They don’t know, neither do they consider: for he has shut their eyes, that they can’t see; and their hearts, that they can’t understand. No one thinks, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, “I have burned part of it in the fire. Yes, I have also baked bread on its coals. I have roasted meat and eaten it. Shall I make the rest of it into an abomination? Shall I bow down to a tree trunk?” He feeds on ashes. A deceived heart has turned him aside; and he can’t deliver his soul, nor say, “Isn’t there a lie in my right hand?”
- Jeremiah 10:3-9 For the customs of the peoples are vanity; for one cuts a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman with the ax. They deck it with silver and with gold. They fasten it with nails and with hammers, so that it can’t move. They are like a palm tree, of turned work, and don’t speak. They must be carried, because they can’t move. Don’t be afraid of them; for they can’t do evil, neither is it in them to do good.” There is no one like you, Yahweh. You are great, and your name is great in might. Who shouldn’t fear you, King of the nations? For it belongs to you. Because among all the wise men of the nations, and in all their royal estate, there is no one like you. But they are together brutish and foolish, instructed by idols! It is just wood. There is silver beaten into plates, which is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the engraver and of the hands of the goldsmith. Their clothing is blue and purple. They are all the work of skillful men.
- Jeremiah 10:14 Every man has become brutish and without knowledge. Every goldsmith is disappointed by his engraved image; for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them.
- Jeremiah 43:12-13 I will kindle a fire in the houses of the gods of Egypt. He will burn them, and carry them away captive. He will array himself with the land of Egypt, as a shepherd puts on his garment; and he will go out from there in peace. He will also break the pillars of Beth Shemesh, that is in the land of Egypt; and he will burn the houses of the gods of Egypt with fire.’ ”
- Jeremiah 50:2 “Declare among the nations and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and don’t conceal: say, ‘Babylon has been taken, Bel is disappointed, Merodach is dismayed! Her images are disappointed. Her idols are dismayed.’
- Hosea 10:2 Their heart is divided. Now they will be found guilty. He will demolish their altars. He will destroy their sacred stones.
- Hosea 10:5-6 The inhabitants of Samaria will be in terror for the calves of Beth Aven; for its people will mourn over it, Along with its priests who rejoiced over it, for its glory, because it has departed from it. It also will be carried to Assyria for a present to a great king. Ephraim will receive shame, and Israel will be ashamed of his own counsel.
- Acts 17:29 Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold, or silver, or stone, engraved by art and design of man.
- Acts 19:26 You see and hear that not at Ephesus alone, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away many people, saying that they are no gods that are made with hands.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (16 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain The beginning of this verse is not rightly explained,…
The beginning of this verse is not rightly explained, as I think, by those who so connect the pronoun demonstrative הוא, eva, as if it had an interposed copulative; and this ought to be noticed, for it gives a great emphasis to the Prophet’s words. Even this is from Israel But what does the Prophet mean? He means this, that the calf was from Israel, as they had long before, at the beginning, formed to themselves a calf in the desert. But we do not yet clearly apprehend the mind of the Prophet, unless we perceive that there is here an implied comparison. For he accuses the Israelites of being the first founders of this superstition, and that they had not been, as it were, deceived by others; for they had not borrowed this corruption from the Gentiles, as it had been at times the case; but it was, so to speak, an intrinsic invention. From Israel, he says, it is; that is, “I find that you are now the second time the fabricators of this impious superstition. Could your fathers, when they forged a calf for themselves in the desert, make excuse (as they did) and say, that they were led by the faith of others? Could they plead that this cause of offence was presented to them by the Gentiles, and that they were ensnared, as it often happens, when some draw others into error? By no means. As then your fathers, when no one tempted them to superstition, became the founders of this new superstition through their own inclination, and, as it were through the instigation of the devil, so this calf is the second time from Israel, for ye cannot otherwise account for its origin, ye cannot transfer the fault to other nations; within, within,” he says, “has this evil been generated.” We now perceive the meaning of the Prophet, which is, that this superstition was not derived from others, but that Israel, under the influence of no evil persuader, had devised for themselves, of their own accord, this corruption, through which they had departed from the true and pure worship of God. It ia indeed true, that oxen and calves were worshipped in Egypt, and the same also might be said of other nations; but rivalship did not influence the people of Israel. What then? It cannot certainly be denied, but that they had stimulated themselves to this impious denial of God.
The same thing may be brought against the Papists of this day; that is, that the filthy mass of superstitions, by which the whole worship of God is corrupted by them, has been produced by themselves. If they object and say, that they have borrowed many rites from the heathens: this is indeed true; but was it the imitation of heathens which led them to these wicked inventions? By no means, but their own lust has led them astray; for being not content with the simple word of God, they have devised for themselves strange and spurious modes of worship; and afterwards additions were made according to the caprices of individuals: thus it has happened, that they are sunk in the deepest gulf. Whence then have the Papists so many patrons, on whom relying, then despise Christ the Mediator? Even because they have adopted them for themselves. Whence also have they so many ungodly ceremonies, by which they pervert the worship of God? Even because they have fabricated them for themselves.
Read full note →
We now then see how grievous was the accusation, that the calf was even from Israel. “There is no reason then”, the Lord says, “for you to say that you have been deceived by bad examples, like those who are mixed with profane heathens and contract their vices, as contagion creeps in easily among men, for they are by nature prone to vice; there is no reason,” he says, “for any one to make an objection of this kind.” Why? “Because the calf your fathers made for themselves in the desert was from Israel; and this calf also is from Israel, for it was not thrust upon you by others, but Jeroboam, your king, made it for you, and you willingly and applaudingly received it.”
The workman, he says, made it, and it is not God Here the Prophet derides the stupidity oú the people; and there are many other like places, which occur everywhere, especially in the Prophets, in which God reprobates this madness of having recourse to modes of worship so absurd. For what is more contrary to reason than for man to prostrate himself before a dead piece of wood or before a atone, and to seek salvation from it? The unbelieving indeed put on their guises and say that they seek God in heaven, and, because idols and images are types of God, that they come to him through them; but yet what they do appears evident. These pretencea are then altogether vain, for their stupidity is openly seen, when they thus bend their knees before a wood or stone. Hence the Prophet here inveighs against this senseless stupidity, because man had made the idol. “Can a mortal man make a god? Ye do certainly ascribe divinity to the calf; is this in the power of the workman? Man has not bestowed life on himself, and cannot for one moment preserve that life which he has obtained at the pleasure of another; how then can he make a god from wood or stone? What sort of madness is this?”
He then adds, It is not God, for in fragments shall be the calf of Samaria The Prophet shows here from the event, how there was no power or no divinity in the calf, because it was to be reduced to fragments. The event then would at length show how madly the Israelites played the fool, when they formed to themselves a calf, to be as it were the symbol of the divine presence. We now see what the Prophet means: for he enhances the sin of Israel, because they had not been enticed by others to depart from the pure and genuine worship of God, but they had been their own deceivers. This is the meaning. It follows —
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain Meaning, the calf was invented by themselves, and of…
Meaning, the calf was invented by themselves, and of their fathers in the wilderness.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Hos 8:6 For from Israel [was] it also: the…
Hos 8:6 For from Israel [was] it also: the workman made it; therefore it [is] not God: but the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces.
Ver. 6. For from Israel was it also] There is an emphasis in "also," and it is as if the prophet should say, This calf of Samaria is no less from Israel, and came out of his shop or device, than that of old set up by them in the wilderness. Israel then brought a calf out of Egypt, Jeroboam brought two; and Israel hath received them, and are much taken with them; so that they cannot attain to innocence (as it is in the former verse), so far they are engaged and so fast joined to idols, that they cannot get off; there is so much of self in it; it was the bairn of their own brain; and hence so overly admired, so clasped and hugged, with the ape, &c.; or rather, as Cleopatra hugged her vipers that sucked her blood, and took away her life, so did they their own inventions, though fairly warned of the danger, Hos 8:3-5. Lo, this was Israel that acted thus madly. Israel that was wont to laugh at or pity other nations for their idolomany, for worshipping the works of their own hands, for going a whoring after their own inventions, for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things, Rom 1:23; as in Lapland, the people worship that all day for a god whatsoever they see first in the morning, Now that a calf worship should be found in Israel, and not only so, but found out by Israel; who was herein worse than Egypt; for that the Egyptians worshipped a living ox of God’s making; but Israel, a dead calf of their own making; such sots they were grown, and so thwart to the very principles of reason.
Read full note →
The workman made it] Who confessedly is no God:
therefore it is not God] for no man can give that divinity to another which himself hath not. Nay, it is certain that God himself by his infinite power cannot make anything to be a God to us. He cannot do this, I say; like as he cannot lie, he cannot die, he cannot deny himself, &c., so he cannot raise a created excellence to that height as to be a God to us. How vile, then, is the voluptuary, that maketh his belly his god! the mammonist, that maketh his gold his god! the ambitionist, that maketh his honour his god! How abominable the mass monger, that maketh his god and eateth him when he hath done! This made Averroes, the Mahometan, cry out; Quoniam Christiani Deum suum mauducant, sit anima mea cum Philosophis, that is, Forasmuch as Christians do eat their God, let my soul be rather with the souls of the philosophers. Those Pseudo Christians, the Papists, stick not to call the consecrated host their God and Lord; and Harding (that sottish apostate, for he was once a zealous preacher against Popery, and wished that he had a voice as loud as the bells of Oseney, to cry it down, Artic. 21), in his disputation against Jewel, is not ashamed to defend it. And yet we all know that that host or sacrament, as they call it, of the altar is the work of the baker, therefore it is no God, neither Lord nor God (whatsoever our Lord God the pope say to the contrary). Which yet further appeareth, in that (as the calf of Samaria here) it may be broken in pieces, or to shivers (which word of ours seemeth to come from the Hebrew shebharim here used), yea, ground to powder, as was the molten calf in the wilderness, whereto the prophet may well here allude. Is not their breaden god broken by the priest into three bits? Is it not chewed with his teeth? May it not be gnawed by mice, become meat for worms, &c.? Murescit, putrescit, et corrumpitur; all which things the Papists themselves confess may befall their god, which is therefore no god, or nomine tantum et non numine deus, a nominal god only ( in cautelis Missae) in the sureties of the Mass. And the like we may say of images and relics (such as is at Genoa, the tail of that ass whereon Christ rode into Jerusalem); these and other monuments of idolatry may, nay, they ought to be broken, burnt, and utterly abolished, Exo 34:13 Deu 7:5 Eze 20:7; as (blessed be God) they are lately among us, by our worthies in parliament; to whom, perhaps, for that and the like good services, we attributed but too much, we even idolized them; and the king of Sweden (that bright northern star) a little before his decease, being in discourse with Dr Fabricius, his chaplain, he told him that he thought God would ere long take him away, because the people did so overvalue and deify him (Mr Clark in his Life).
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain For, or because,
For, or because,
from Israel, by their invention and authority, was it also, both the idol and the worship of it.
Read full note →
The workman, the founder, silversmith, or goldsmith,
made it; fashioned the calf.
Therefore it is not God; you are sottish fools to think it is a god: if the making it will not convince you it is no god, yet I hope the destroying it will prove, whatever it was made for, or whatever thought to be, yet it was not, nor could it ever be, a god.
But the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces; but when the idol is broken into pieces, Samaria shall see it was but a calf, and confess their folly in worshipping it; however, the destruction of it will be a perpetual witness of Samaria’s sin, and God’s just displeasure in its ruin.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain For from Israel was it also,.... That is, the…
For from Israel was it also,.... That is, the calf was from Israel; it was an invention of theirs, as some say; they did not borrow it from their neighbours, as they did other idols, but it was their own contrivance: but this tines not seem to be fact; for the calf, the making of it indeed, was of themselves, but the worship of it they borrowed from the Egyptians; with this difference, the Egyptians worshipped a living cow or ox, these the golden image of a calf: but rather the sense is, that this calf was made by the advice of Israel, by the advice of Jeroboam their king, and of their princes, they assenting to it, so Aben Ezra; or the gold and silver of which it was made was exacted on them, and collected from them, as the Targum and Jarchi; or workmen were employed by them to make it; and so it was of them also, as any other work that was done by their advice and direction, and at their expense; and therefore could never have any divinity in it, any more than other things they did; though this is commonly interpreted as having respect to the making of the golden calf by Aaron, that this also was of Israel as well as that:
the workman made it; therefore it is not God; a strong and invincible reason this; for, since the call was the work of an artificer, of the goldsmith or founder, it could not be God; there could not be deity in it; for a creature cannot make a God, or give that which itself has not; if the workman was not God, but a creature, if deity was not in him, he could never give it to a golden image, a lifeless statue fashioned by him: this, one would think, should have been a clear, plain, striking, and convincing argument to them, that their calf was, as the Targum has it,
Read full note →
"a deity in which there was no profit:''
but the calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces; or "for (f) the calf of Samaria", &c. being another reason to prove it could not be God; if the former would not convince them, this surely would, when they should see it broke to pieces by the enemy, from whom it could not save itself; and therefore could not be a god that could be of any service to them, or save them. The Vulgate Latin version renders it, "for the calf of Samaria shall become spiders webs": and Jerom says he learned it of a Jew that the word so signifies; but his Jew imposed upon him: it, does not appear to be any where so used, either in the Bible, or in any other writings. Kimchi interprets it shivers, fragments, broken pieces of anything. Jarchi says it signifies, in the Syriac language, beams, planks, and boards, pieces of them; so the Targum and Ben Melech from the Rabbins; or rather the dust which falls from them in sawing, sawdust; to dust as small as that should this calf be reduced, as the golden calf was ground to powder by Moses, to which, it is thought, there is an allusion.
(f) "nam", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius; "quia", Schmidt; "quoniam", Pagninus, Montanus.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain From Israel - By their invention. It - Both…
From Israel - By their invention. It - Both the idol and the worshippers of it.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 6. The workman made it; therefore it is…
Verse 6. The workman made it; therefore it is not God] As God signifies the supreme eternal Good, the Creator and Upholder of all things, therefore the workman cannot make Him who made all things. This is an overwhelming argument against all idols. Nothing need be added. The workman has made them; therefore they are not God.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain For - This verse may assign the reasons of…
For - This verse may assign the reasons of God’s displeasure, “mine anger is kindled;” or of Israel’s impenitency, “How long will it be?” This indeed is only going a little further back, for Israel’s incorrigibleness was the ground of God’s displeasure. And they were incorrigible; because they had themselves devised it; “for from Israel was it also.” Those are especially incorrigible, who do not fall into error through ignorance, but who through malice devise it out of their own heart. Such persons act and speak, not as seduced by others, but seducing themselves, and condemned by their own judgment. Such were Israel and Jeroboam his king, who were not induced or seduced by others to deem the golden calf to be God, but devised it, of malicious intent, knowing that it was not God. Hence, Israel could be cured of the worship of Baal, for this was brought from without by Jezebel; and “Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel.” But of the sin of the calf they could not be healed. In this sin all the kings of Israel were impenitent.
From Israel was it also - Their boast, that they were of Israel, aggravated their sin. They said to God, we, Israel, know thee. So then their offence, too, their brutishness also, was from those who boasted themselves of bearing the name of their forefather, Israel, who were the chosen people of God, so distinguished by His favor. The name of Israel, suggesting their near relation to God, and the great things which He had done for them, and their solemn covenant with Him to be His people as He was their God, should, in itself, have made them ashamed of such brutishness. So Paul appealeth to us by our name of Christians, “Let every one who nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity” 2Ti 2:19.
Read full note →
The workman made it, therefore it is not God - The workman was rather a god to his idol, than it to him, for “he” made it; “it” was a thing made. To say that it was made, was to deny that it was God. Hence, the prophets so often urge this special proof of the vanity of idols. No creature can be God. Nor can there be anything, between God and a creature. : “Every substance which is not God is a creature; and that which is not a creature, is God.” God Himself could not make a creature who should be God. The Arian heresy, which imagined that God the Son could be a creature and yet an object of our worship, or that there could be a secondary god, was folly as well as blasphemy. They did not conceive what God is. They had low, debased notions of the Godhead. They knew not that the Creator must be removed as infinitely above His most exalted creature, as above the lowest.
Nor do the prophets need any subtleties (such as the pagan alleged) that their idol might be indwelt by some influence. Since God dwelt not in it, any such influence could only come from a creature, and that, an evil one.
The calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces - The calves were set up at Bethel and at Dan, but they were the sort of tutelar deity of the ten tribes; therefore they are called “the calf of Samaria.” They represented one and the same thing; from where they are called as one, the calf, not “calves.” A thing of nought it was in its origin, for it had its form and shape from man; a thing of nought it should be in its end, for it should be “broken in pieces,” or become “chips, fragments,” for fire.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Israel. This enhances the crime. Can a people so…
Israel. This enhances the crime. Can a people so highly favoured adore the work of an artist? --- Webs, such as appear on a fine day in autumn. St. Jerome’s master suggested that this was the sense. Interpreters vary. (Calmet) --- Septuagint and Theodotion, "is delusive." Symmachus, &c., "instable;" shebabim. (Haydock) --- Some erroneously read v instead of i. "The Lord casts off the calves of heretics, ... and wonders that people should prefer heretical filth before the cleanliness of the Church." (St. Jerome)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain from Israel was it--that is, the calf originated with…
from Israel was it--that is, the calf originated with them, not from Me. "It also," as well as their "kings set up" by them, "but not by Me" (Hos 8:4).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 6. From Israel was it also [“is even this”]…
6. From Israel was it also [“is even this”] — What? Evidently the calf of Hos_8:5. In its establishment Jehovah had no part; it is the work of Israel; therefore the former has cast it off. To join this clause more closely with 5a, 5b is transposed by some so as to stand before Hos_8:5; Hos_8:5 c is explained as a later gloss. Since the idol is made by human hands it can be no God (R.V.) — These words imply that the people identify the image with the deity. To show its impotence it will be broken to pieces.
Under the figures of sowing, growing, and reaping (compare Hos_10:12-13) the prophet pictures once more, in Hos_8:7, the destruction of Israel. “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap” (Gal_6:7).
Read full note →
Wind — A picture of vain, unprofitable conduct. The harvest will be whirlwind — Not only will they derive no benefit from their conduct, it will result in actual destruction. Of the sentences following G.A. Smith says, “Indeed, like a storm Hosea’s own language now sweeps along, and his metaphors are torn in shreds upon it.”
It hath no stalk — R.V., “he hath no standing grain.” The figure differs slightly from the preceding. Israel is pictured as sowing corn, but it withers before the stalk develops. A.V. is to be preferred.
The bud [“blade”] shall yield no meal — Even if the stalk forms it will yield no grain from which meal might be made. Should it bring forth grain Israel will not be benefited, for strangers shall seize it. Nothing but disappointment and ruin is ahead of the nation.
In Hos_8:8-11 the prophet, in a sense, corrects himself. In Hos_8:7 he has said that the destruction is sure to come, but as he looks upon the nation he sees that ruin is already present, and he cries out in agony,
Israel is swallowed up — Foreigners have already begun to devour the nation (Hos_7:8-9); complete destruction is only a question of time.
Now shall they be — Better, R.V., “now are they”; the prophet is describing a present situation.
A vessel wherein is no pleasure [“none delighteth”] —A worthless vessel. Its resources have been sapped (Hos_7:9) by greedy nations; now it is cast aside like a vessel for which there is no further use (Jer_22:28; Jer_48:38). In illustrating this phrase, Thomson speaks of the readiness with which pottery is cast away in the East: “The coarse pottery of the country is so cheap that even poor people cast it away in contempt, or dash it to pieces on the slightest occasion.”
What has caused this condition of affairs? Their own stubbornness. 9. They were determined to mingle among the nations, and these proved their destruction. Of the nations one is singled out.
Gone up to Assyria — For assistance (Hos_7:11).
A wild ass alone by himself — To be taken with the preceding words; it is a description of Israel’s foreign policy. The point of comparison is obstinacy (Gen_16:12; Job_39:5-8). Wild asses ordinarily move in droves, but sometimes a single animal, resisting the gregarious instinct, will run away and thus expose itself to danger.
Israel has been warned again and again, but resisting all warnings is determined to have its own way, whatever the consequences.
Ephraim hath hired lovers — Literally loves. In the Hebrew there is a play upon words, the original for wild ass and for Ephraim being similar in sound. The reference is apparently to the gifts sent by Ephraim (Israel) to secure the friendship of Assyria or Egypt (Hos_7:11; Hos_12:1). LXX. has a different reading, but it is no improvement over the Hebrew. Various emendations have been proposed; for example, “Ephraim gives love gifts,” which requires but a very slight alteration. To restore the parallelism, as in Hos_7:11; Hos_12:1, some read “Egypt” in the place of “Ephraim”: “To Egypt they give love-gifts.” The thought is not altered by these emendations.
Of Hos_8:10 it has been said, “No single word of this entire verse is of certain meaning.” As a result translations have been many and emendations not a few. The most recent commentators, Marti and Harper, relieve the situation by rejecting the verse as a later gloss, but for this there are no adequate reasons. For 10a, unless the text is changed, the interpretation suggested by the English versions, especially R.V., “though they hire among the nations,” seems the most satisfactory. Though they may succeed to some extent in gaining the support of the nations, Jehovah cannot permit the present policy to continue, for its continuation would frustrate completely the purpose of Jehovah for Israel.
Now will I gather them — Israel, not the nations. Israel is to be gathered in like a flock, which is put in the fold to prevent the wandering of the sheep. They are to be put under restraint, their reckless negotiations are to be interrupted. Thus Jehovah may yet be able to teach Israel his ways. What the method of restraint will be is not stated, but the next sentence indicates that the prophet has in mind an exile. Hos_8:10 b is even more difficult.
And they shall sorrow a little for the burden of the king of princes — R.V., “and they begin to be diminished by reason of the burden of the king of princes.” Margin, R.V., goes back to A.V. With either translation the sense seems to be that Israel, when under restraint, will suffer from the burdens imposed by the king of princes — the king of Assyria (compare Isa_10:8). In the inscriptions the Assyrian kings frequently call themselves “king of kings.” The translations do not agree as to the derivation of the verb; A.V. derives it from a verb to sorrow, to be sick, to suffer pain, while R.V. traces it to a verb begin, to which Von Orelli gives the additional meaning, release, relieve. As the form is written in the great majority of the Hebrew manuscripts the translation of R.V. is to be preferred. The policy of oppression practiced by the conquerors will diminish the prosperity and numbers of Israel. Why “begin”? A smoother reading, requiring but few changes in the original, is afforded by LXX.:” and they shall cease for a little while from the anointing of a king and of princes.” While the exile lasts they will be compelled to be without their own rulers (Hos_3:4; compare Hos_13:10). This threat is exceedingly appropriate here, and it is quite probable that LXX. has preserved the original text. What contrast to the ease with which they now place kings upon the throne! (Hos_8:4.)
Hos_8:11 introduces the justification for the threat of judgment, which is repeated in 13b. The substitution of a cold, formal ceremonial for obedience to the divine requirements is responsible for the downfall. The present text is made somewhat cumbersome by the presence of the first “for sinning,” or “to sin.” To remove the difficulty some read in its place “to make atonement,” which requires but a slight change in the vocalization of the verb form. Ephraim made the altars for purposes of atonement, but their purposes have become perverted. This is an improvement, but it is more likely that the first “for sinning” has come into the text through the carelessness of a copyist, whose eyes lighted accidentally upon the end of the second part of the verse, and that it should be omitted. With this omission the verse may be translated, “For though Ephraim made many altars, they have become to him altars for sinning.” The common notion was that the offering of sacrifice was sufficient to win the divine favor; the more numerous the altars the greater the divine pleasure. This false notion the prophet attacks (Isa_1:11 ff.; Amo_5:21 ff.); the altars have only increased Israel’s guilt. How? Hos_4:12 ff., supplies the answer.
Hos_8:12 also is full of difficulties. The translation itself is uncertain. R.V. differs from A.V. only in reading “the ten thousand things” instead of “the great things”; the latter is in accord with the Masoretic suggestion, the former follows the Hebrew text; in this R.V. is preferable. For “my law” LXX. and Vulgate read “my laws,” which is probably original. To get this reading no change in the consonantal text is required. The translation of the tenses also is uncertain; LXX. and Vulgate have the future, Targum and Peshitto the past. The first, verb in Hebrew is an imperfect, which expresses a variety of ideas but always implies incompleteness, Here the verb might be rendered, (1) “I did write” (and am writing still); (2) “I will write”; (3) “I am writing,” or “I am wont to write”; (4) “I did write repeatedly”; (5) it might be hypothetical, “Were I to write,” or (6) concessive, “Though I wrote,” or “Though I should write.” Which of these is the proper translation? Naturally, commentators disagree. To the present writer the choice seems to lie between (5) and (6), and of these (6) seems the more probable; and of the two possible renderings the former seems more in accord with the context. If this translation is accepted the whole verse will read: “Though I wrote for him the ten thousand of my laws, they were counted as strange things,” or “as those of a stranger.” The misconduct of Israel is not due to ignorance; Jehovah gave instruction continuously, but his laws were considered as something foreign, and therefore of no authority. Ten thousand or myriads is not to be understood literally; it simply means a great number. On law see comment on Hos_4:6. The passage certainly implies the existence of written laws, but it does not prove the existence of the entire Pentateuchal legislation. On the contrary, the context seems to indicate that the laws did not deal to any great extent with the ceremonial or with sacrifice; of these Hosea speaks very lightly. He seems to emphasize rather the moral and civil legislation, such as is found, for example, in Exodus 21-23.
In Hos_8:13 the prophet returns to the religious practices.
They sacrifice flesh for the sacrifices of mine offerings, and eat it — R.V., “As for the sacrifices of mine offerings, they sacrifice flesh and eat it.” The latter follows the Hebrew text more closely. The word translated “mine offerings” occurs only here; its meaning is not quite certain, though it comes probably from a root to give. Sacrifices of mine offerings is ordinarily interpreted as equivalent to my sacrificial offerings, and, unless we assume a corruption of the text, this is the best interpretation. These sacrifices, consisting of flesh, are offered, but Jehovah does not care for them, since the right disposition is wanting and the givers neglect the weightier matters. Therefore “the only positive result is that the sacrificer has the luxury of a dinner of fresh meat” (compare Hos_4:8). The whole is a condemnation of the heartless religious practices. The measure is full. The blood of the sacrificial animals cannot blot out their sins; he will remember them and will proceed to execute the judgment, which will take the form of an exile.
They shall return to Egypt — The house of their former bondage. The mention of Egypt could not but suggest the sufferings of the early Israelites, but it is hardly correct to regard Egypt here as “merely a type of the land of bondage” (Keil), and thus to interpret the reference as a “poetic expression for captivity in general.” The prophet undoubtedly intended the words to be understood as predicting an exile in Egypt (compare Hos_9:3; Hos_9:6; Hos_11:5). The Israelites appealed, now to Assyria, now to Egypt; these very nations will prove the ruin of Israel (compare Isa_7:18; Isa_11:11, etc.).
Hos_8:14 sums up the cause of it all.
Israel hath forgotten his Maker — This is the root of all evil (see on Hos_2:20), but especially of the false policy which could see help only in human defenses, and which led them to seek help among the surrounding nations and build temples — Better, with R.V., “palaces,” or “castles,” in parallelism with fenced [“fortified”] cities — The building of palaces and fortified cities, as such, is not condemned by the prophet. What he does condemn is the fact that in these, and these alone, the people put their trust, to the absolute disregard of Jehovah. The latter will vindicate himself by utterly destroying the human defenses.
Fire — War (as in Amo_1:4 to Amo_2:5). Hos_9:14 b seems to be dependent upon Amos (Amo_1:4; Amo_1:7, etc.), who prophesied about twenty years earlier. Hosea might, therefore, have been acquainted with the words of the earlier prophet. Most modern commentators consider Hos_8:14 an addition. The reasons for this opinion are summed up by Harper: (1) The reference to Judah is not called for; (2) the style resembles that of Amos rather than that of Hosea; (3) the natural conclusion of the discourse is in Hos_8:13, hence Hos_8:14 only weakens the climax; (4) the thought of Jehovah as Israel’s Creator is unexpected in Hosea’s time; (5) the verse is superfluous in the strophic system. Whether or not these reasons are conclusive against Hosea’s authorship of Hos_8:14 each one must decide for himself.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 6. For from Israel was it also] Rather, was…
6. For from Israel was it also] Rather, was this also; i. e. this idol too (as well as the usurping kings) was Israel’s work, unsanctioned by me. But the construction is very dubious, and the integrity of the text may well be questioned.
the workman made it; therefore it is not God] Lit., ‘and it is not God.’ It has a merely fictitious existence (so Hos_13:2). The sarcastic words of Hosea contain the germ of the vehement polemic of the later prophets against idolatry in general.
Read full note →
but … in pieces] Rather, yea, Samaria’s calf shall be (broken to) shivers (Targum, ‘chips of boards’).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (6) It is best to abandon the Masoretic punctuation,…
(6) It is best to abandon the Masoretic punctuation, and translate, For it (i.e., the calf) is from Israel (not of Divine origin); as for it, an artificer made it, and it is no god. Yea, the calf of Samaria shall be shattered to fragments (literally, become splinters or fine dust).
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain For from Israel was it also: the workman made…
For from Israel was it also: the workman made it; therefore it is not God. The prophet here vindicates the justness of Jehovah"s complaint and the folly of Israel"s conduct. The first clause points out the orion of this idolatry this god of gold was out of Israel, it proceeded from them and was invented by their kings. The second clause shows that it was of human manufacture; while the natural inference follows in the third clause to the effect that, having its origin with man and being made by man, it could not be God. Or if the rendering, "Thy calf disgusts," be adopted, the ki introduces the explanation of the disgust which that abomination caused. This idol was of home manufacture, not imported from abroad, as Baal and Ashtaroth from the Sidoniaus, Chemosh from the Moabites, and Moloch from the Ammonites. The Israelites themselves and their king Jeroboam made for the northern kingdom what had been learnt in Egypt. Thus Israel"s god was a creature of Israel"s own devising. How stupid and how absurd! Israel"s god man-made, how enormous and abominable the iniquity! But the calf of Samaria shall be broken in pieces. It shall become splinters; the hapaz legomenon, yb is derived from an Arabic root, shaba, to cut; and thus, as the calf at Sinai was burnt and pulverized, the calf of Samaria shall be broken into splinters and destroyed. The whole verse is well explained by Kimchi: "Now ye will see if the calf is able to deliver its worshippers; it cannot even deliver itself, for it shall become splinters, as if he said that the enemies shall break it up and carry it away for the worth of the gold, not for any utility that is in it while it is still in the form of a calf. yb is equivalent to (broken pieces, shivers), fragments." The Septuagintal rendering, planwn , is probably due to the reading bbewOv, Mic_2:4, "turning away.
The broken idol.
Read full note →
The calf-worship in northern Palestine is an example of the inconsistencies to which human nature is liable, and the declensions incident to social and national life. The indignation of the prophet is a fit expression of the displeasure of Jehovah. And the threat conveyed in the language of the text must have been felt by those to whom it was addressed to be as righteously deserved as it was certain to be executed. The lesson of the passage is a more general and extensive one than appears upon the surface. We are reminded of
I MAN"S PRONENESS TO SET OTHER OBJECTS IN THE SUPREME PLACE WHICH OF RIGHT IS GOD"S. Every object, every being, every pursuit, which men place in the position which is God"s alone, becomes an idol. Thus idolatry is a sin of all times. Pleasure, fame, learning, power, etc., all by turns assume the throne of the heart, stand in the shrine of Deity.
II SUCH IDOLATRY CAN ONLY ISSUE IN HUMAN DISAPPOINTMENT. The vanity of trusting to the works of their own hands was impressed again and again upon Israel, until at length idolatry was rendered forever impossible to them. How much of the Old Testament consists of warnings that to trust in other refuges, in other helpers, than in Jehovah is the way to shame, confusion, and destruction! Confounded be all they that serve graven images." Who is there that has forsaken God, and sought another deliverer, but has been miserably disappointed?
III THE DIVINE DISPLEASURE IS MANIFESTED TOWARDS SUCH AS FORSAKE GOD FOR OTHER HELPERS. His honor he will not give to another. He sent prophets to Israel, and inspired them to upbraid and to denounce the unfaithful and apostate. The greater the mercies the Hebrew nation had enjoyed, the greater the Divine indignation with those who, having been so favored, had so rebelled.
IV DOOM AND DESTRUCTION ARE PRONOUNCED BOTH UPON IDOLS AND UPON THOSE WHO TRUST IN THEM. "The calf shall be broken in pieces." The reed, upon which the faithless leans, shall pierce his side. He shall see the hosts in which he trusted melt into nothingness before his eyes. Riches shall take wings and fly away. The bubble of honor shall burst and vanish. The blossom of power shall be nipped, or the fruit shall fall unripe. Man is but man, and not God.
V THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROVISION IS TO LEAD TO REPENTANCE AND TO RETURN UNTO THE LORD. Declarations of displeasure and denunciations of wrath afford no pleasure to the Divine mind that authorizes them. God"s threat to destroy all rivals to his authority and supremacy must indeed be literally fulfilled. But for those who return to the God they have forsaken, there are open arms, there is a heart of mercy, there are words of pardon, there is welcome, restoration, and life. T.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain The workman made it; therefore it is not God.
Hos_8:6
The workman made it; therefore it is not God.
Read full note →
The religion of humanity
Humanitarianism has become the creed of the earnest and thoughtful who have found for themselves the awful truth regarding their fellow-men in the depths, and with that ever pressing upon them, have forsaken all else to grapple with that evil and right that wrong. It has become the home of loving, aching hearts that have lost their God. It has also become the mere fad of many who put on charity as they do a garment when it is fashionable, and are philanthropic when philanthropy is in vogue. But let these hangers-on of humanitarianism be distinguished from humanitarians. Humanitarians proper are large-souled enthusiasts. Humanitarianism has been elevated to the dignity of a religion, and the humanitarian god has been hailed as the God of humanity. When that is so, we have to look at the work in a new light, and study anew the claims which it puts forth. And, first of all, I think we may safely say that the first duty of any one who desires to elevate a cult to the rank of a religion is to demonstrate that it is applicable to humanity in general, that it is deep enough to find a common basis in characters the most widely diverse. For that only is really religious which can be shared by all. The beauty-lover, who is convinced that in the power of perceiving and appreciating the beauty and harmony of the universe lies the uplifting of his Kind, sets himself to show that that power is to be found, latent at least, in every one. The moralist, who thinks that a certain code of laws, if strictly adhered to, would meet all wants and settle all difficulties, has, for the first part of his task, to prove that an inherently moral nature is co-existent everywhere with human nature. And the humanitarian, too, must show that his religion may be a religion for humanity. To the enthusiasts who are fired to generous forgetfulness of self it may seem for a time to fulfil the purposes of religion. They find in it an aim, an inspiration, a faith. But what of the other side! Will it do for a religion to those who are to be uplifted to the passive element, which, in their scheme, is simply to permit itself to be raised to better conditions of life? Ah! that is where humanitarians err. They cling tenaciously to their theory that conditions make humanity. It is true, we grant it, but it must at the same time be admitted that humanity makes its own conditions. The conditions of mans material life, ii they be evil, eat slowly but surely into his soul with corroding influence. But is the converse not also true? Does what a man is, down in the heart of him, not stamp itself upon his surroundings? Does not the likeness of a soul body itself out by slow degrees in the conditions amid which it exists? Conditions the most favourable for the growth of virtue, if round an ignoble soul, become a rich soil for vice to grow in. Beauty may be changed to ugliness by mans vulgar breath, harmony to discord by his strident voice. Conditions make humanity, and humanity makes its conditions. But these two truths were never meant to be brought into violent opposition. A perfect humanity is the humanitarians dream, but a perfect humanity is an impossible thing. If humanitarians would study humanity more they would see the weakness of their claim for humanitarianism as a religion. There is a something in humanity, an unknown quality, which for ever evades the analyst. There is a wailing need for something greater than itself, the something never seen but still desired, there is a hidden strength totally unpresaged by the individuals past life. Humanity is full of surprises; only the most careful student of it knows how small the circle is within which he may work, how great is the tract outside of it which must be allowed for unknown powers and their influences. Only those who know its waywardness, its uncertainty, its inherent weakness, its potential greatness, know how strong a hope, how Divine a thought, humanity needs for its deliverance. To serve is to obey, but do humanitarians ever dream of obeying the humanity which they deify? And to look to humanity as a paymaster, ah, what wages of sorrow they are earning, what disappointed hopes, what frustrated endeavours, what bitterness of heart that there is not sweetness enough in the world to sweeten! Oh, that they had given as unto God, and He would have repaid; that they had followed Christs example--to serve God and save humanity. Then God would have rewarded, and humanity would have been the recompense. And now the thought of Christ arrests us. What, after all, is the humanitarianism which we have been seriously considering as a new religion, but a branch of practical Christianity? The limitation, which is its weakness, is all that is new in it. Why, then, has it attained such great proportions, become so prominent that it has for the time overshadowed all other considerations? Simply because it was for so long overshadowed and neglected. And yet the Church, whatever it may have done, has seen and attempted the greater part. It has taught this part of Christs doctrine, that to be heroic and Christlike is better than to be comfortable. But the humanitarian flood answers back vehemently--Your God is a God for the idealists, for those who in their visionary world delight themselves with thoughts of ideal beauty, and goodness, and truth, and never feel the burdened heart of the world of reality labouring beside them. Your creed is a creed for the comfortable, the well-to-do, the intellectual who study Christs marvellous philosophy, and forget that His practice gave it its power, and demonstrated its truth. Heroism is for the strength of the individual heart; the ideal is a home for the individual soul, but the attitude and practice of man towards his fellow-men should be that of pitying, helpful love. Christ was heroic. He stood majestic and unmoved in the midst of a scoffing, incensed mob. Yet He was the champion of the friendless woman taken in adultery. He lived the life of an idealist, and fed His soul on the beauty of heaven. Yet He was always ready to render practical help to those in trouble or adversity. The duty of the Church as an exponent of Christ is to expound Him fully and equally. The Founder of Christianity came to enlarge, and deepen, and exalt the sphere of every life. It is terrible to think how, instead of helping Christ in such a work, we spend so much time and energy in crushing the life and power out of men; out of the boy or girl who want sunshine and joy to brighten their growth; out of the young man or woman enthusiastic with a great purpose to do good;--how we crowd men and women out of their places and push them down and cause them to despond, when all the while we could have inspired hope and given them life. The mission of religion is to give true increase of life, and the Church of Christ exists to help on the work. And the members of Christs Church should each feel upon them the twofold chain that links them to God and their fellow-men. If our march were but from the cradle to the grave, then we could afford to leave such aids as the Church and religious communion out of account, and the creed and practice of the humanitarian might satisfy us. But are we only the creatures of the passing hour? Nay; verily the chords we strike here in the music of life are but the prelude to a never-ending song. When all our material wants are satisfied there is still a hunger of the soul which refuses to be allayed, because only God, the Infinite One, can satisfy it. We are infinite, spiritual beings, and no finite, material God, such as the humanitarian worships, can give lasting help and sarisfaction. Nothing but the Infinite can fulfil our infinite needs; nothing but the Highest can satisfy those who are made in the image of the Most High. We need a God wide as the universe and eternal as the life to which we belong. (A. H. M. Sime.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 General Information:
General Information:
Yahweh is speaking.
Read full note →
For the people sow the wind and reap the whirlwind
To sow or plant the wind is to act in useless or destructive ways. To reap the whirlwind is to suffer disaster from one's own actions. (See: Metaphor)
The standing grain has no heads
Here "head" refers to the part of the plant where the grain is. A stalk with no head has nothing to give to the farmer. In the same way, Israel's actions will result in nothing good. (See: Idiom)
If it does come to maturity, foreigners will devour it
If any of Israel's actions do happen to result in something good, Israel's enemies will come and take it from them. (See: Metaphor)
translationWords
Israel
God
cow
Samaria
grain
alien
devour
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.