God`s Enduring Love in the Book of Hosea
Transcription
God`s Enduring Love in the Book of Hosea
Joy Philip Kakkanattu God's Enduring Love in the Book of Hosea A Synchronic and Diachronic Analysis of Hosea 11,1-11 Mohr Siebeck Joy Philip Kakkanattu, born 1964; 1999 Licentiate in Sacred Scripture from Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome; 2005 Doctorate in Theology from Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome; presently teaching Old Testament at Dharmaram Vidya Kshetram (Pontifical Athenaeum of Philosophy, Theology and Canon Law), Bangalore. Acknowledgements ISBN 3-16-148886-5 ISBN-13 978-3-16-148886-3 ISSN 1611-4914 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2. Reihe) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationa1bib1iographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de. © 2006 Mohr Siebeck Tiibingen. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tiibingen, printed by Guide-Druck in Tiibingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Held in Rottenburg. Printed in Germany. The present work is in essence a dissertation presented to the Pontifical Gregorian University in May 2005 with minor modifications. Many people have encouraged and helped me to complete this work and to see it through publication. It is with the greatest pleasure that I express my gratitude and appreciation to all those who have helped me in one way or another during my time in Rome and in the realisation of this doctoral thesis. My deepest expression of gratitude is due to Prof. Charles Conroy, the moderator of this thesis. In addition to his scholarly guidance and perceptive suggestions, the example of his gentle ways and unfailing availability has in itself been a valuable lesson to me as to the qualities necessary in a good teacher of the Sacred Scriptures. The study is indebted too in its basic inspiration and methodology to Prof. Conroy. My sincere thanks are also due to Rev. Sr. Nuria Claduch-Benages who acted as the second reader of my thesis and who made important observations and comments. I am most grateful to Dr. Paul Kalluveettil, CMI and Prof. Hermann Spieckermann, who kindly read my work at an early stage of its preparation and provided their scholarly comments. I ammuch indebted to their suggestions. I wish to express my profound gratitude and appreciation to Fr. Simon Nolan, O. Carm and Fr. Nick Kern for having read the draft of the dissertation and for having indicated necessary linguistic and stylistic modifications. I place on record my sincere gratitude to my confreres and religious superiors of the CMI congregation for their consistent support and friendship. I remember with gratitude my parents, brothers, sisters, friends and well-wishers in India and elsewhere for their love, support and prayers. In a special way I acknowledge the friendship and kindness ofPfarrer Peter Gede and Mrs. Gertrud Dik to me at various occasions. Lastly, I must express my gratitude to the editors of the series Forschungen zum Alten Testament, Prof. Bernd Janowski, Mark S. Smith and Prof. Hermann Spieckermann, for having accepted this work for publication. Rome, September 2005 Joy Philip Kakkanattu, CMI 126 3) Major Part 1 The reason for this ignorance is the spirit of promiscuity1l5 and forgetting of Yahweh's gracious acts. Botterweck summarises various expressions that are parallel to I:J'H"~n,lt1. In prophetic criticism attacking absence or rejection of I:J'H"~n.lJ1, ~e find n;:,tli (skl:z) as a parallel: "Since you have forgotten (n;:,tli) the t6~aof your God, I also will forget your children" (Hos 4,6). Its absence stands in parallel with apostasy ('~:::l: 5,7; 6,7), rebellion ("~: 7,14; 9,15; ill/?: 12,1; 14,1), adultery (i1JT: 1,2; 2,4.7; 3,2; 4,12; 5,4 etc.), iniquity (tlin;:,: 10,13; 12,1) deceit (il~'~: 12,1), and faithlessness (n":l ';l.ll: 6,7; 8,1;:::l~ P~\f: 10,2)116. The various aspects of the paradigm "knowledge of God" in Hosea are summarised concisely by Jeremias: T ' To teach "knowledge of God" is primarily the duty of the priest (4,6); it has got fourfold implication: 1. The knowledge about to whom Israel owes its existence its fruits of the land (2,10) and to whom they must be thankful for the protection and salvation in the course oftheir history (11,3); 2. what follows from this knowledge is that there is no other helper for Israel except Yahweh (13,4) and thus apostasy to other gods and maintaining adulterous relationship with them and other powers appear as the senseless evil par excellence (5,4); 3. as a necessary consequence of such a knowledge of God arises the devotion to the true God and at the same dedication to fellow human beings in need, resulting from an intimate communion of life, which is implied by the parallel notion 1]esed and finally 4. the concretisation of such dedication is found in the directives for day to day life, which again the priest must give, which together constitute the instruction of God (4,6 parallel concept to "knowledge of God"), in so far as it is a help for the life and conduct 117. On the basis of Hos 11,1-11, as Harrelson thinks, in addition to the basic meaning of "a knowledge of and commitment to the sacral law, to the demands and promises of the covenant faith", one may also think of a deeper knowledge: "God exercises the fullness of his deity in rejecting judgement and choosing forgiveness. He remains the Holy One - hating sin, holding his people accountable for sin; but as God, not a human being, he refuses to let his love for Israel be set aside and made of no consequence because of the sin ofIsrael"1I8. In sum, the concept of knowledge of God in Hosea has got a special meaning and is marked with objective and subjective aspects. Objectively it is to know Yahweh as a result of the study of divine intervention in the salvation-history handed over through sacred tradition. Subjectively it means to acknowledge Yahweh and his acts and manifest this recognition in a righteous relationship with him in genuine worship and in proper interpersonal relationship. Lack of this knowledge will lead to lawlessness in the community and to divine anger and rejection. 1I5 116 117 118 Cf. ANDERSEN - FREEDMAN, Hosea, 391. Cf. BOTTERWECK - BERGMAN, "lJ,' yiida''', 476. JEREMIAS, Der Prophet Hosea, 61.W. HARRELSON, "Knowledgeof God in the Church", Int 30 (1976) 13-14. T Theological Themes of Hos 11 in Relation 3.3 The God of Hosea to the Book of Hosea 127 119 That Hos 11,1-11 presents a unique understanding of God is obvious from a very simple reading of the text. The portrayal of Yahweh's relationship with Israel by means of parent-child metaphor is rather rare in the Old Testament120• The description of the early history of the people ofIsrael as Yahweh's parental rearing of the child Israel is unique in the Bible. The perception of Yahweh, who finds the reason for forgiving Israel from within his very nature, is also special to Hosea 11. The self-presentation of God "the Holy One in your midst" articulates a significant understanding of Yahweh as wholly other than humans but also as one who makes himself available to humanity through his presence. 3.3.1 Yahweh, the Loving Parent Hosea 11 does not explicitly mention Yahweh as father, but such a notion is implied by the mention ofIsrael as Yahweh's son and may be derived from the context. In keeping with the general understanding of God, scholars used to speak ofthe Yahweh-Israel relationship in Hosea 11 as a father-son relationship. But the portrayal of Yahweh as father has been challenged by many authors in recent years. They regard Hos 11 as a text that illustrates a motherly or feminine aspect ofYahwehl2l. This challenge has led to a careful attention in the interpretation of the metaphor122• 1I9 It is not our intentionwith this headingto investigatethe role of Hosea in the development ofIsraelite religion or to discusshis role as the spokesmanof Yahweh-AloneMovement etc. Such an approach can be seen in N.P. LEMCHE, "The God of Hosea", Priests, Prophets and Scribes: Essays Joseph Blenkinsopp on the Formation and Heritage of Second Temple Judaism in Honour of (ed. E. Ulrich et al.) (JSOTSup 149; Sheffield 1992) 241-257. Despite the title Lemchehardly speaksof the God of Hosea. Our purpose is to examinethe conceptof God Hosea describesthrough the parent-childmetaphorand its relation to other metaphorsin the book. 120 Cf. H. RINGGREN, ":JK 'iibh", TDOT 1: 17-18: the various references to Yahweh as father of people listed are E~od 4,22; Deut 32,6; Jer 3,19; 31,9; Isa 45,9-11; 64,7(8); Hos 11,1 ff.; Mal 2,10. 121 Cf. in this regard SCHUNGEL-STRAUMANN, "God as Mother in Hosea 11", 194-218; M.-T.WACKER, "Traces of Goddess in the Book of Hosea" in A Feminist Companion to the Latter Prophets (ed.A. Brenner)(FCB 8; Sheffield 1995) 234-241; IDEM, "Das Buch Hosea" in Kompendium feministische Bibelauslegung (eds. L. Schottroff- M.-T. Wacker)(Giittersloh 21999) 307-308; NISSINEN, Prophetie, 268-290; R.J. RAJA,"God as Mother in the O. T.", 21 (1991) 107-117. 122 For a recent investigationof the metaphoricexpressionsof God's fatherhoodin the Old Jeevadhara Testamentwith specialattentionon the gender connotations,cf. PJ. NEL,"Does Changingthe MetaphorLiberate?On the 'Fatherhood' of God", aTE 15 (2002) 131-148. The authorargues that the fathermetaphor,though it has bearing on the patriarchalfather figure,"never emphasises the biologicalmasculinityof God. The dominantreferencesof the metaphorare to relationalaspectsindicativeof a caringand protectivebond betweenGodand his people" (136). By 128 We have already seen that the attempt Yahweh in maternal or feminine fetched. The syntax and grammar that Hosea portrays activities Yahweh Yahweh regarded gives sufficient as maternal and the attitudes Ztigen, as speaking and grammar to justify of is far- the claim some ofthe he shows, e.g., lifting the child credence proposes obwohl 11 11123• However, and affectionate and give certain on this Seifert m.E. vor allem mit mutterlichen Hosea evidence father in Hos it (vA), the tender tion of Hos 11,1-11. Based to show terms based on philology as Israel's accomplishes to the cheek and feeding usually I Major Theological Themes of Hos 11 in Relation to the Book of Hosea Part I care (vs.3---4.8), are to a feminine that "Hos interpreta- 11 zeigt JHWH es keineswegs unangemessen This interpretation motherly tenderness of Yahweh (II: 1-5). This love has been spumed, yet the Lord cannot give them up completely. Judgement must give way - indeed must create - renewal (11:8-11). Ultimately, God will heal the people's infidelity, ingratitude, ignorance, and rebellionl28. Nevertheless, as a father who cares for his son Israel with and love seems to be more acceptable on the basis of the what would God in Hos 11 is be improper to use the parent of God. Trible, parental, "male and female" categories cf. also Jer to withhold 31,20)127. House his anger against the rebellious son (vs.8-9; is close to the point: Israel's history is presented as the story of a loving parent faced with raising a rebellious child. God called Israel, taught the Israelites how to walk, fed them, and guided them the fatherhood of God, what is highlighted is God as "progenitor and creator ofIsrael" (137). He holds, "The emphasis serves, not only to manifest God's authority, but to stress the purpose of the divine commitment to the people ofIsrael and to exhort them to abstain from profaning this relationship to their own detriment" (137). Being a committed father, despite Israel's apostasy, he shows compassion and restores their future. In Nel's opinion "the qualities or attributes of God presumed to exist in the metaphor of 'fatherhood' could best be mentioned in the different contexts instead of using the metaphor 'father'" (142). At the same time "to leave the option open by replacing 'father' equally with 'mother' would be futile. 'Parent' might be a translation option, only those instances where the simile offamily relations is explicit" (143). 123Cf. BRAATEN,"Parent-Child Imagery", 306. 124SEIFERT,Metaphorisches Reden, 201. 125Cf. SIMIAN-YOFRE, II deserto degli dei, 116. It is noteworthy that Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Dives in misericordia, makes reference to Hos 11,3 as a witness to the motherly tenderness of the merciful love of God in the Old Testament, cf. G. BORGONOVO - A. CATTANEO,Giovanni Paolo teologo: nel segno delle encicliche (Milano 2003) 96. LANDY,"In the Wilderness of Speech", 41--41, discusses the difficulty of the parent metaphor to explain the metaphoric relation between Yahweh and Israel: "God nostalgically imagines himself as a parent (11: 1--4) and accordingly demands filial obedience from Israel, but the insistence is compromised by two things: first, the bifurcation between father and mother images, and the denigration of the latter in the book (e.g., 2:4, 6; 4:5); second, the question whether God is actually a parent. Iffantasy does not correspond to reality, then his capacity to be a "good-enough" parent is impaired by doubt. We do not know the meaning of God's parenthood". 126GROSS,"Das Hohelied", 87-88. 127RENDTORFF,Theologie des Alten Testaments, 192. He notes a difference between the paternal care and maternal love of God. The former has certain claims on the son and when the claims are not fulfilled, God becomes angry. On the contrary the latter contains only the solicitous aspect and does not have the demanding and anger element as in the father figure (cf. 190-192). or maternal. for gender of God", is unequivocal. of God, because It is essential God. To describe solely or maternal our notion in view of Yahweh to perceive who looks after the child tenderly claims that God using male the image of God and to perceive i.e., paternal then we bring to our discussion and not the concept It would determination rightly image of God is to glimpse the transcendence of God13o. Seifert's remark on the parent metaphor ofHos 11 is probably two aspects, bringing to the image of God and not to God. The then, is to perceive suited, Yahweh paternal and "image 11 as Hos Israel129. The image of towards as an argument "God" of God gives a clue for understanding and female looks after Israel, his son like a mother126• that prompts imagery is the finger pointing rel about which ofthe love and compassion is to regard rather than specifically distinguishing textual and linguistic evidence than the uncritical attempt to depict Yahweh as a mother in Hos 11125• So one can probably speak of Yahweh, the father, who It is this parental be more appropriate to the fore the parental love and care of Yahweh image ist, sie viiterlich zu nennen"124. 129 and lovingly, apt: if we quar- is more correct of mother the language the God as he appears the and and father of Hos 11 here: the one and who does so enduringly131. One must also pay attention to the fact that the parent metaphor is only one among the many metaphors Hosea employs to portray Yahweh's intimate relationship with his peoplel32. Or put another way, the description of Yahweh's love towards Israel as parental love is only one aspect of the description of Yahweh's loving bond with IsraeJl33. In Hos 1-3 it is described through the metaphor of 128PR. HOUSE,"The Character of God in the Book of Twelve", in Reading and Hearing the book of the Twelve (eds. J.D. Nogalski - M.A. Sweeney) (SBLSymS 15; Atlanta, Ga. 2000) 131. 129Cf. EIDEVALL,Grapes in the Desert, 167-174 argues that Hos 11,1--4 contains several different metaphors for the interactions between Yahweh and Israel. For him "the passage 11:1--4conveys the notion of divine guidance by means of three different metaphors: the parent calling upon the child (v 1), the shepherd walking in front of the sheep (v 3), and the farmer leading the oxen home to the stall (v 4)". 130Cf. PH.TRIBLE,God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (OBT 2; Philadelphia, Pa. 1978) 20-21. Likewise RENDTORFF,Theologie des Alten Testaments, 192. 131Cf. SEIFERT,Metaphorisches Reden, 201-202. Cf. also J.D.W. WATTS,et aI., "God the Father", ISBE 2: 509; NEL, "Does Changing the Metaphor Liberate?", 142-143. 132According to G.W. LIGHT,"The New Covenant in the Book of Hosea", RevExp 90 (1993) 219-238, the various metaphoric networks - marriage, parenthood and agriculture - are united by a common presentation of Yahweh as a person who desires an intimate relationship with his counterpart. [For a fuller treatment of the metaphors and similes for Yahweh-Israel relationship, cf. NWAORU,Imagery; EIDEVALL,Grapes in the Desert]. 133 Cf. P.A. KRUGER,"Prophetic Imagery. On Metaphors and Similes in the book of Hosea", JNSL 14 (1988) 150: "The Hosean imagery covers the whole spectrum of Yahweh's revelation in history: at the one end stands his burning anger over against the sin of his people, and the other the depth and intensity of Yahweh's love. The one moment Yahweh is like decay in the bones (5: 12), the next his work resembles that of a loving father (11: 1 fi) who, notwithstanding the obstinacy of his son, was not able to surrender him (II :8). Precisely this feature indicates 130 Part I 3. Major Theological Themes of Hos 11 in Relation to the Book of Hosea spousal relationship. There too Hosea presents Yahweh's love towards Israel as a constant love, which does not end even when Israel proves to be unfaithful. Instead he tries to bring the erred Israel back by "speaking to her heart (:l"-"17 ,:l,) (Hos 2,16)". Hosea envisages that this same love would be given with the eventful reconciliation 134."Hosea is able to express as no other prophet the love of God for Israel in its varied forms-as compassion (11 :8), as a mother's tenderness (1:6-8; 2:3, 6, 21, 25; 11:1), as love between husband and wife (3:1 ff.). From the fundamental disposition of love, it is understandable that healing and reconciliation, not harm and destruction, finally prevail", wrote Heschel several decades agol35. Is it possible to understand the marital (Hos 1,2-3,5) and parent-child imagery in Hosea as parts of a root metaphor of the family or should they be taken as two isolated and distinct metaphors? According to scholars like Dearman and Nwaoru, in the ancient Near Eastern cultural milieu, family/household was the primary social unitl36: "The family as a social institution and economic unit has members and possessions whose roles can be gender-specific, but these roles are not carried out in isolation from their Sitz im Leben (= household) which provides each member with his or her primary identity"137. Hence these two metaphors used to express Yahweh's relation to Israel, can be understood as part of the common metaphor, familyl38. Israel b~cause of his misconduct. Israel's guilt was so great that he deserves total annulment of filial status and abandonment. But, on the other hand, it is the failure of Yahweh, the parent, too because it signifies the collapse of Yahweh's basic purpose of election. Yahweh, being God, cannot let his design fall short. He cannot allow human response to determine his plan. Hosea finds a solution to this dilemma in the compassionate nature of God, which does not permit his anger, even though it is the consequence ofIsrael's erratic ways, to overwhelm his lovel40. Thus Hos 11,1-11 speaks of the victory of Yahweh's divine nature, which is love, and his holiness (vs.8-9). It is a victory of love, for the whole history of Israel is initiated and perpetuated by Yahweh's love for them 141.Love is the motive why God enters into relationship with humanity in general, and Israel in particular (Hos 11,1; 14,5; Deut 7,7-8). The God ofIsrael is enduring in his love for them. 3.3.1.1 The Theological Meaning of the Metaphor Through the parent-child metaphor Hosea 11 delineates the relationship between Yahweh and Israel as familial and personal. By depicting Yahweh as a parent who persistently loves his child, despite his rebellious and ungrateful attitude, Hosea finds a reason for Israel's survival. Hosea presents Yahweh as a loving parent who suffers internally for the sake of his stray/disoriented son. The question "How can I give you up, how can I deliver you up Israel?" (Hos 11,8) communicates vividly his suffering. One may define this suffering as a "painful blend of love and wrath"139. On the one hand his justifiable anger rises against the ambivalence of the Hosean imagery. To choose therefore, one of these images and regard it as the key to the whole book would be just as fatal as to look for one central idea which holds together the Old Testament". 134 C.L. SEOW,"Hosea, Book of', ABD 3: 297. 135 HESCHEL,The Prophets, 49. 136 Cf. A. DEARMAN,"Yhwh's House: Gender Roles and Metaphors for Israel in Hosea", JNSL 25 (1999) 106-107; NWAORU,Imagery, 96-108. 137 DEARMAN, "Yhwh's House", 107. 138 For the view that Israelite family structure as the basic framework that provides basis for the parent-son metaphor for Yahweh-Israel relationship, cf. SCHENKER,"Gott als Vater", 3-55. 139 P.S. FIDDES,"The Cross of Hosea Revisited: The Meaning of Suffering in the Book of Hosea", RevExp 90 (1993) 184-186. The question "does God suffer" is a very complex and highly debated one. The advocates of the passibility of God often quote Hos 11,8 in support 131 3.3.2 Yahweh, the Holy One Among Humans The affirmation "I am God, not man, the Holy One in your midst" may be considered the theological hinge upon which the whole book turns. For Hosea the whole merit of Israel's survival is based on the holy nature of God, who unlike humans does not modify his basic purpose according to the response of his covenant partner. Yahweh, being divine, is able to withhold his anger against Israel for their unfaithfulness and ingratitude. Even though Israel has to undergo certain punitive measures for his wayward behaviour, for Hosea, this punishment is not terminal but salutary and corrective. The compassionate nature of Yahweh is too great to permit his beloved child to perish (Hos 11,8-9)142. of their argument. More than a theological issue, the passibility and impassibility of God is a matter of philosophical dispute. It is not my intention, when I say Hos 11,8 communicates the inner suffering of God, to join in the philosophical debate on the passibility and impassibility of God or to negate the Christian doctrine of the impassibility and immutability of God. For a thoroughgoing discussion ofthe question, cf. WEINANDY,Does God Suffer? (Edinburgh 2000) 1-26. 140 Cf. E. BONS,'''Denn ich bin Gott, nichtein Mensch'. Eine Auslegung von Hosea 11", in Gottes unbeirrbare Liebe, Hosea 11. Materialheft fUr Gottesdienst und Gemeindearbeit [no Editor] (Bausteine flir den Gottesdienst; Stuttgart 2003) 17. On the prophets' understanding of the wrath of God as his abandoning people to the consequences of their own sins, see FIDDES, "The Cross of Hosea", 183-186; further S.E. BALENTINE,The Hidden Face of God: The Hiding of the Face of God in the Old Testament (Oxford 1983) 143-151. 141 Cf. JDNGLING,"Aspekte des Redens von Gott", 358. 142 Cf. SEOW,"Hosea", 297; BUCK,Die Liebe Gottes, 84. C. HARDMEIER, "Systematische Elemente der Theologie in der Hebraischen Bibel", JBTh 10 (1995) 111-127, speaking of the systematic elements of the theology of the Old Testament with reference to Hos 11,8 also highlights the compassionate aspect of Yahweh. He remarks: "1m Unterschied zu allen anderen Gottem der Religionsgeschichte verkorpert der Gott des Alten Testaments personal diese Unbestimmbarkeit und Unverfligbarkeit selbst und als solche. Darin ist er als Gott unverglei- 132 Part I 3. Major Theological Themes of Hos 11 in Relation to the Book of Hosea In this theological affirmation Hosea articulates the transcendence and immanence of the God of Israel143. The holiness (lD"P) of God highlights his transcendent nature. The title "Holy One" for Yahweh 11,9 refers to his otherness from human beings (cf. Isa 6,3)144. But this otherness is manifested not in standing aloof from the human milieu but in his immanent presence in dynamic dealing with humans145. He is totally other from humans in that he is able to hold back his anger in order to remain faithful to his basic design. His holy nature is manifested in that he is willing to forgive the transgressions of his people, even without their asking it (cf. Hos 2,16; 14,5). Because He is God he can transform a human catastrophe like a war into a means of purification (11,5). In other words, "for God to be transcendent means that he intimately relates to, is lovingly present to, and dynamically acts within the created order as the one who is ontologically wholly other than the created order"146. Through the phrase "Holy One in your midst" Hosea presents Yahweh as someone who is different but at the same time present in the midst ofthe people through his condescension 147.The prophet seems to consider Yahweh's dwelling in the midst of the people as a characteristic of divine holiness. The holiness of Yahweh becomes available and experienceable for Israel only because he has manifesfud himself in a relationship of love expressed through various metaphors like covenant, family relationship and thus revealed himself amidst the people. According to Hos 11,1-11, God's holiness becomes a tangible presence in his decision not to execute his anger and in his constant love, despite Israel's turning away (;'~'lDT?) (V.7)148.Thus Hosea traces the basis of Yahweh's love in his holy naturel49. Or, alternatively "it is the incomprehensible creative power oflove which marks out Yahweh as the wholly 'other"'150. Jiingling summarises the message of Hos 11,8-9 rather well: chlich, einzigartig undjeder metaphysischen Objektivation enthoben. Doch wird JHWH durch die lange und wechselvolle Geschichte Israels hindurch auf vieWiltigste Weise und in den unterschiedlichsten Traditionen und Bildem als ansprechbares Du bezeugt, d. h. als personales Du das sich seinem Yolk und den einzelnen Menschen zwar im Extremfall begriindetermaBen aU~hzomig zeigen kann (wenn auch stets gegen seinen eigenen Willen),jedoch als ein personal ansprechbares Du, das sich vor allem und immer wieder giitig, gniidig und barmherzig, rettend und heilsam den Menschen zugewandt hat und stets von neuem zuwendet" (122). Cf. also KRASOVEC, Reward, Punishment, and Forgiveness, 419. 143 A similar theology can be seen in Isa 6,3-6; Psa 24, cf. H. SPIECKERMANN, "Die ganze Erde ist seiner Herrlichkeit voll- Pantheismus im Alten Testament?", ZTK 87 (1990) 415--436, especially 418--419. 144 Cf. W. KORNFELD - H. RINGGREN,"tViP qds", TDOT 12: 539; BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1-39,225. 145 Cf. BUCK,"Die Liebe Gottes", 186: "'Heilig in deiner Mitte' [... ] nimmt verschiedene Bedeutungsnuancen an, je nachdem es vom 'Handeln Gottes', von seiner 'Zieisetzung' oder von seiner 'gottlichen Personlichkeit' verstanden wird. Da jedoch diese drei erwiihnten Bedeutungsaspekte sich gegenseitig nicht ausschlieBen, in Gegenteil, sich vervollstiindigen, liisst es sich rechtfertigen, hier 'heilig' in der Gesamtheit seiner Bedeutungsaspekte aufzufassen". As WEINANDY,Does God Suffer?, 55-57, with logical rigour claims, the biblical notions of transcendence and immanence of God, when describing God and his relationship to all else, are often misconceived. To him "the Old Testament never conceives of God's transcendence in opposition to his immanence, as if that which makes God wholly other is different from that which allows him to be a personal God who lovingly acts in time and history. For the Bible, transcendence and immanence do not describe two divine modes of being or two sets of distinguishing qualities - one as God is apart from the created order and another as he is in relation to the created order. That which makes him divine, and thus wholly other as so transcendent, is what which equally allows him to be active within the created order and so be immanent". 146 WEINANDY, Does God Suffer?, 57. 147 Cf. J. LIMBURG, Hosea - Micah (Interpretation; Atlanta, Ga. 1988) 41--42. 133 Since Yahweh is God and not a man, for that reason and only for that reason he is the person in love (der Liebende), who does not come for destruction; since Yahweh is God, since he is the holy one, he is the person in love, who masters his wrath. Yahweh is not a man/human being, who lets himself be overpowered by anger, but on the contrary he shows his godly nature in that he overcomes the anger through lovel51. The theological perception that the Assyrian domination and exile is a means of purification for Israel to make good their sins and return to Yahweh, their loving parent, is important and provides a theological hope of restoration after the period of punishment (cf. Hos 2,16-25; 3,4-5; 6,11; 11,10-11; 14,5-9)152. Hosea clearly envisages a period of punishment for Israel's sins. The Assyrian military domination is conceived as God's judgement upon Ephraim and as the consequence of their wayward comportment. He figuratively speaks of a return to Egypt as a consequence ofIsrael's apostasy, which in actuality would probably signify the 148 Cf. JEREMIAS, "Zur Eschatologie", 84. Cf. further E. ZENGER,"Wie und wozu die Tora zum Sinai kam; Literarische und theologische Beobachtungen zu Exodus 19-34", in Studies in the Book of Exodus: Redaction - Reception - Interpretation (ed. M. Vervenne) (BETL 126; Leuven 1996) 283. 149 Cf. BUCK,"Die Liebe Gottes", 137: '''Heilig in deiner Mitte' begriindet also das Wirken der Liebe Jahwes hinsichtlich seines Handelns, mit Bezug auf die Zielsetzung aber den schlieBlichen Sieg der Liebe und deutet hinsichtlich des gottlichen Seins schon an, dass Gottes Wesen Liebe ist". Similarly, BJORNARD,"Hos 11,8-9",21-22. 150 W. EICHRODT,Theology of the Old Testament, vol. 1 (OTL; Philadelphia, Pa. 1961) 281. 151 JONGLING,"Aspekte des Redens von Gott", 358: "weil Jahwe Gott ist und nicht ein Mann, deswegen und allein deswegen ist er der Liebende, der nicht zur Zerstorung kommt; weil Jahwe Gott ist, weil er der Heilige ist, ist er der Liebende, der seinen Zorn besiegt. Jahwe ist nicht ein Mann/Mensch, der sich vom Zorn iiberwiiltigen liiBt, sondem er beweist sein gottheitliches Wesen dadurch, daB er den Zorn durch Liebe iiberwindet". 152 Cf. JEREMIAS, Der Prophet Hosea, 171. A thorough analysis of the relation between the prophetic oracles of judgment and salvation often juxtaposed in Hosea, is beyond the scope of this study. In this regard, cf. for instance S. HERRMANN,Die Prophetischen Heilserwartungen im Alten Testament: Ursprung und Gestaltwandel (BWANT 5; Stuttgart 1965); R.E. CLEMENTS, "Patterns in the Prophetic Canon", in Canon and Authority: Essays in Old Testament Religion and Authority (eds. G.w. Coats -B.a. Long) (Philadelphia, Pa. 1977) 42-55; PJ. KING, "Hosea's Message of Hope", BTB 2 (1982) 91-95; H.G.M. WILLIAMSON, "Hope Under Judgement. The Prophets OfThe Eighth Century BeE", EvQ 72 (2000) 291-306. 134 Part I Assyrian 3. Major Theological Themes of Hos 11 in Relation to the Book of Hosea exile (11,5; also 8,13; 9,3.6.15)153. not consider this punishment return to the landl54. Naude's However, as annihilation. comment Rather, the book of Hosea does it speaks of restoration and on 11,9 stresses this perspective: The Lord, the Holy One in the midst of the people, is nonetheless not a destroyer or demon, even when the people have been guilty of great profanity, but intends purification through a devastating catastrophe. His purpose is not destruction, but a new future for Israel. Because God is holy, he is free from the moral imperfections and frailties common to humanity (Hos 11:9) and can be counted on to be faithful to his promises (Ps 22:3[4]155. The reversal of the exodus is conceived threshold for a new, harmonious 2,16-25; 14,5-9), loving when call and return possible according not only as a punishment and lasting divine-human the elected people to their homeland to Hosea 11,8-9 respond but also as the relationship to the voice (11,10-11)156. this return of the people but Yahweh's passionate and compassionate love, which has its basis in his divine and holy naturel57. As Williamson points out, "we find here a hope struggling triumphantly to emerge from the darkness, mercy of the sovereign grounded exclusively in the grace and is, therefore, Lord"158. his wrath) the consequence his heart for the people. However, a positive and conversion) they hearken where induces repentance of the persistent And the forgiveness and return. Repentance love of Yahweh, is aimed who suffers at achieving in reconcilia- tionl59. As Bons suggests: 153FIDDES,"The Cross of Hosea", 184, makes a valid observation on this point: "The theologian has to decide how to interpret two kinds oflanguage of judgement-the language of 'letting people go' and the language of direct punishment through a foreign power. I suggest that it is consonant with the nature of God revealed in Hosea to interpret the second language in terms of the first. While the Hebrew idiom is that of direct causation, with God's sending the Assyrian army to wreck havoc, we are to understand this theologically in a more indirect way; God consents the self-destructive consequences of sin in Israelite society, which make it an easy prey to the invader". 154Cf. e.g., HESCHEL,The Prophets, 51; SEOW,"Hosea", 297; Cf. ZIMMERLI,Old Testament Theology, 190. See further GROSS,"Zorn Gottes", 69-70. 155NAUDE,"lLiip", 882. 156Cf. B.S. CHILDS,Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testament (Minneapolis, Mn. 1993) 177. 157Cf. e.g., CHILDS,Biblical Theology, 354. As K'RASOVEC, Reward, Punishment, and Forgiveness, 419, affirms: "Divine sanctity must surely be more a matter of the imperative of God's love and redemption than of the demands of divine wrath, for the former was and is the driving force behind Creation and the completion of the world. The purpose of Creation and history of mankind is so manifest that no force can hinder the implementation of God's plan". Cf. also H.G.L. PEELS,Shadow Sides: The Revelation of God in the Old Testament (Cumbria 2003) 65--66. 158WILLIAMSON, "Hope Under Judgement", 304-305. 159Cf. NWAORU,Imagery, 179. response is expected tured relationship. by correcting their ways (by means from the people The changed attitude to the voice of Yahweh Israel refused of the people and follow the call of Yahweh can be traced of repentance for the reestablishment of the rup- is clear from the fact that him (v.lO) in contrast to 11,2, for Baal. in Hos 2,16-17. Hos 2,16 presents Yahweh the husband's attempt to relate to Israel the unfaithful wife by speaking to her heart (:::It,-t,!1 1:::li) in such a way as to convince her that even if she forgets her husband (2,15), he will not forget her. More than a love-speech, the expression "speak to the heart" is an imparting of Yahweh's love for Israel and a breaking of the impasse and forgiveness Hosea 11 does not posit repentance as a prerequisite for Yahweh's forgiveness. On the other hand, as 11, I0-11 indicates, though implicitly, Yahweh's forgiving Israel, (i.e., not executing Yahweh (foes not wait - and this is the unprecedented thing with Hosea - for Israel's conversion (Umkehr); rather he takes the first step and by that he enables Israel's return (Ruckkehr). The sequence of events is thus not sin - punishment - Israel's conversion - new gift of Yahweh, but Yahweh turns back (umkehren) so to say first and gives Israel the unconditional gift of new salvationl60. The same pattern of Yahweh's What makes is not the repentance (cf. Hos 135 It is an expression of non-communication. that leads to reconciliation of unconditional and the strengthening love of a disrupted relationship (cf. Gen 34,3; 50,21; Judg 19,3; Isa 40,1). As a consequence forgiveness 2,18-25)161. Israel will respond positively and return to covenant fidelity (Hos As has been said already, Hosea does have a sense of punishment for sins. However, pardon "The it is not to destroy, and, hence, so-called but to help the people realise Yahweh's is "transformative"162. punishment Kalluveettil was envisaged formulates is to be made ofthe by God as a disciplinary action, in the form of an aspiration of the people (6,1-2), divine healing/forgiveness an invitation to Yahweh so sure as the seasons. in of election fact that Hosea does speak of conversion or as a hope (3,5). In 6,1 the wish to return loving it succinctly: order to force Israel to turn back to him. Thus once more the purpose ofIsrael to live as a 'con-verted' people was realised"163. Mention of this (:::l,tli)164 to them (14,2-4) is based on the hope of The invitation to return in 160BONS,"'Denn ich bin Gott, nicht ein Mensch"', 17: "JHWH wartet nieht - und dies ist das Unerhorte bei Hosea - die Umkehr Israe1s ab; er tut vielmehr den ersten Schritt und ermoglicht ihm somit die RUckkehr. Die Reihenfolge des Geschehens ist also nieht SUnde- Strafe - Umkehr Israels - neue Zuwendung JHWHs, sondem JHWH kehrt gleichsam als Erster urn und schenkt Israel bedingungslos neues Heil". 161Cf. G. FISCHER,"Die Redewendung '~i - ein Beitrag zum VersW.ndnisvon Jes 40,2", Bib 65 (1984) 249; FABRY,"~~ leb",418. 162Cf. JEREMIAS,Der Prophet Hosea, 21; FIDDES,"The Cross of Hosea", 186-190. 163P. KALLUVEETTIL, "Convertere as the Christian Ideology", Journal of Dharma 28 (2003) 37. 164For a fuller treatment of the use the use of the root ~,lLi and the theme conversion in Hosea cf. G. FOHRER,"Umkehr und Erlosung beim Propheten Hosea", ThZ 11 (1955) 161-185; H.W. WOLFF,"Das Thema 'Umkehr', in der alttestamentlichen Prophetie", ZTK 48 (1951) 129-148. "!1-~" 136 Part I 14,2--4 is also grounded on Yahweh's healing ofIsrael's ;'~itLil? (11,7; 14,5)165. The hope ofIsrael's return to Yahweh in 3,5 is not to be understand as the result of the punishment mentioned in 3,4 but much more as the consequence of the love of Yahweh, that waits for Israel's retuml66. Abma, commenting on Hos 3,5 observes: "On the one hand, it is up to Israel to repent, but, on the other hand, Yhwh's love for the people and his faithful partnership may motivate this repentance and open up this perspective"167. Thus for Hosea, return to Yahweh is not a precondition for Yahweh's healing and pardon, rather it is Yahweh's healing that makes the return possiblel68. In other words, God's initiative in offering pardon does not primarily depend upon human response. However, "forgiveness aims at achieving reconciliation; so the completeness of its work is dependent upon the response of the offenders, and this in turn involves the pain of recognising that their life is under judgement"169. God's forgiving love is, hence, abounding grace freely given to erring humanity, which needs to be accepted through repentance for its complete realisation in a reconciled and harmonious divine-human relationship. 165 I follow here the interpretation of JEREMIAS, Der Prophet Hosea, 168-174. Cf. also WOLFF,"Das Thema 'Umkehr"', 141; JEREMIAS,"Zur Eschato1ogie", 84; BaNS, Das Buch Hosea, 169; R. SCORALICK, Gottes Gilte Gille und Gottes Zorn: Die Gottespriidikationen in Ex 34,6fund ihre intertexuellen Beziehungen zum Zwo/fProphetenbuch (HBS 33; Freiburg 2002), 158-159. But the text 14,2-9 can also be understood as a sequence of deed-consequence, i.e., "zuerest emsthafe Umkehr - dann die gott1iche Gnade", cf. FaHRER, "Umkehr", 230. For a thorough study of Hos 14,2-9, evidencing the various interpretative difficulties of the unit, cf. P.A. KRUGER,"Yahweh's Generous Love: Eschatological Expectations in Hosea 14:2-9", GTE 1 (1988) 27-48. 166 Cf. BONS,Das Buch Hosea, 66; DAVIES,Hosea, 104. 167 ABMA,Bonds of Love, 209. 168 J. UNTERMAN,From Repentance to Redemption: Jeremiah:S Thought in Transition (JSOTSSup 54; Sheffield 1987) 154-165, who discusses the dialectics of repentance and redemption in Hosea has a somewhat different understanding ofthis point. He claims that there is an inconsistency of the message of redemption in Hosea. According to him, Hos 2,16-25 and 11,8-11 depict redemption despite the people's lack of repentance while Hos 3,5 and 14,2-9 portray redemption preceded by repentance. He attributes this inconsistency to the inner turmoil of the prophet regarding the Judgment and mercy of God. EMMERSON,Hosea: An Israelite Prophet, attempts to resolve the apparent inconsistency between Hos 11,8-11 (cf. 2,16-25) and 14,2-9 by suggesting that these texts manifest two diverse theologies of repentance: first, the Hosean, reflected in 11,8-11, speaks of pardon without having repentance as a prerequisite and the second seen in 14,2-9, posits repentance as a precondition for Yahweh's pardon (cf. pages 52-55). JEREMIAS,Der Prophet Hosea, 169-170, makes the very plausible suggestion, that 14,2-9 is wholly an invitation and was conceived as an invitation of God for conversion, an invitation which was motivated by the promise of God in vs.5-9. Historically, 14,2-9 would have been composed after 722 BC by the disciples of Hosea, who survived the disaster. 169 FIDDES,"The Cross of Hosea", 190. PART II