Bible Study for Texas for 7_20_62303

Posted: 6/20/03

July 20

Hosea 4:1- 12; 8:1-10,14

God's charges against Israel

By Sam Dennis

In August of 1998, William Jefferson Clinton escaped the indignity of being the first sitting president brought before a grand jury as he volunteered to give his testimony via technology, the technology of videotape. Ken Starr, independent counsel, agreed, and a four-hour testimony ensued in the Map Room of the White House.

However, when the president emerged, his ashen countenance drawn, all of America realized something was amiss. Accusations of impropriety previously leveled were true. And America's president faced the nation to say so. In the days that followed, public opinion both evolved and divided, and however one may or may not have felt regarding the matter or the investigation, this was certain, an entire nation felt this pain.

As hard as it might be to imagine ourselves enduring something like this, the truth is what God requires from each of us, be we national leaders or not. He holds us accountable for life and actions, just as he did Israel before her fall into the hands of Assyria in 722 B.C. As such, God's requirements are to be taken seriously, just as they were for the land of Israel in the 8th century B.C.

The charge

Chapter 4 of Hosea begins with God's charge against Israel. It is something he wants them to “hear” (v. 1). “Hear” was a regular admonition of the prophets. Even Jesus was in the prophetic tradition when he said, “take heed how you hear.”

So Hosea calls Israel to “hear the word of the Lord,” and these first verses begin with that word. Centering upon three complaints, all in the form of a lawsuit complete with charges, evidence and judgment, the charges are “no faithfulness, no love and no acknowledgement of God in the land” (v. 2). These three, “faithfulness, love and acknowledgement,” come from the Hebrew words “emet,” “hesed” and “da'ath.” “Emet” comes from a root meaning, “to stay, to sustain, to support” and in some cases can be translated as “truth”–such as something is true because it is firm, counted upon or, in this sense, loyal. So the charge is that Israel had no staying power, no faithfulness, nor could they be counted upon.

The next charge lacking in Israel's covenant religion comes from the word, “hesed.” This is a favorite word in the Hebrew language, though all translations seem to fall short of its meaning. G. Campbell Morgan has called this “kindness,” “the stoop which is prompted by love.” So that translating the word as such is not wrong. John Strange points out that “this is the kind of love about which Jesus was speaking in response to the question: and who is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29).

The third charge by God against the people of Israel comes from the word, “da'ath,” meaning “no knowledge.” The NIV translates this as “no acknowledgement of God in the land” (4:1). In Greek, the same is translated as “epignosis” from “gnosko” (to know) meaning, “not knowing” or “to know not.”

The Hebrews would also use this verb in a sexual sense, describing intimacy. In our time this understanding remains, albeit passing, as English language has associated the verb with something more than head knowledge, but experiential intimacy, as well.

Be this as it may, the Israelites had no knowledge of God in the land, no intimacy, no intercourse. And we should remember that this was a charge to people steeped in religious ceremony and tradition, but with its real meaning lost.

Verse 3 continues that these wrongs have resulted in judgment upon the land itself. “Because of this the land mourns,” (v. 3) which is to be understood as cause to effect.

Next, the "doings

But beyond the charge of God concerning what Israel was not doing, there was also a charge against them for what they were. In a lawsuit, this would be evidence. With God's people there is “cursing” and “lying” and then “murder, stealing and adultery” (v. 2).

Taken together, these actions comprise a formidable list. The first two, cursing and lying, may be seen as the opposite of truth (faithfulness)–something the Israelites were lacking (v. 1). These two sins of commission suggest sins against God. The other three, murder, stealing and adultery, are sins of commission that suggest sins against others, an order akin to the progression of God's Ten Commandments.

When sins are committed against God, there will likely follow sins against others. As Strange writes, “Man can never be right with his brother until he is right with God.” At the root of the present state with Israel is this … “when loyalty, love that stoops, and knowledge of God is abandoned, moral chaos results.”

The preachers were at fault, too

God makes special requirements of his leaders, and verses 4-10 expand to this important group. And because everybody loves a preacher story, (usually meaning we prefer a story having to do with “sensational” sins rather more than “little” ones) this penchant may cause us to overlook things that matter most!

Case in point, the priests of Israel were accused of failing in their responsibility to pass on the knowledge of God. Not real glitzy? Well, look at the implication and judgment it brings. “My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge,” the text reads. And “because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests” (v. 6). This time the word “knowledge” relates to knowledge imparted, which is the principal responsibility of the priests.

They, meaning both priests and prophets, (vv. 4, 5) have “ignored the law of God” (v. 6). So God places the blame for the people's unresponsive attitude on the shoulders of them. This is a serious breach in responsibility that God will not tolerate. Even the words, “I will destroy your mother” can be taken to mean the priestly clan. Though “mother” usually references the nation itself, in this context it is hard to imagine this as other than the family of the priests and prophets, hence the basis for its meaning “clan.”

This was devastating as religious leaders were held in high regard by Israel's society and enjoyed a standing passed from one generation the next (v. 6). Notice, too, that the religious leaders were the first and primary to come under God's judgment (vv. 4-9).

And what about the kings

In light of our lesson title, “God's Charges,” and the central thought that religious beliefs and practices can transform a society for good or lead it into evil, chapters 7-10 move us to a critical time in Israel's history. It is the time leading up to Israel's fall to Assyria in 722 B.C. It also is a time that certainly implicates them as to wrongs in following after leaders who were a sham.

In an article written by professor Marvin Tate, chapters 7-10 of Hosea are described as a “national disaster.” In short, they chronicle a ministry of Hosea that was to a completely “disorganized society.” And rightly so, as the historical situation after the death of Jeroboam II in the north (746 BC) created a difficult time for the smaller kingdoms of Israel and Judah, as well as the neighboring states of Damascus, Hamath, Tyre and Gaza.

The interest by Assyria in the lands of Palestine and Syria was not new. They had long desired the timber and minerals of the land west of the Euphrates. The Assyrians had been conducting campaigns to the west for over a century, though most with little staying power due to a weak power base back home in Mesopotamia. When Tiglath-Pileser came to the throne (745-727 B.C.), this was changed, and the days of Assyria's expeditions were over.

As Tate writes, “Israel and Judah now faced the full might of an autocratic empire determined to conquer, occupy, deport and rule.” The problem, though, was not with Assyria as far as God was concerned. They were only a tool in the hands of God to execute his judgment.

Instead, the chaos of Israel was reflected in their foreign policy. Hosea 7:8 reads: “Ephraim mixes itself with the nations” (Israel's move to ally with other nations), and, using the baker metaphor, “Ephraim is a cake not turned” (7:8).

"Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind"

From chapter 7, we move to chapter 8, a chronicle from God meant to be concise. It seems more clearly defined and specific. Many think it was probably a chronicle reflecting Israel's conditions post 733 B.C. or after Tiglath-Pileser's successful conquest of the northern region of Israel (possibly alluded to in 8:8).

Chapter 8 is best summed with the phrase of verse 7, “for they sow the wind to reap the whirlwind,” which is a saying and conviction common in the wisdom writings. Meaning, when a saying is sown in the wind (ruach), it is sown in unstable behavior (Proverbs 11:29, Job 7:7, Ecclesiastes 1:14, 17).

In chapter 8, the prophet poses Israel's failures clearly, “they have broken my covenant and transgressed my law (v. 2). And he adds, they have broken it in several ways by setting “up kings without my consent” (v. 4). One thinks of the string of five kings following Jeroboam, none of whom came to a good end nor were regarded by God. Also, they have made idols (v. 4), and they have broken their covenant by abandoning their identity (v. 8), a particularly grave breach considering God's call for Israel to be his testimony among the nations (a people by which the nations will be blessed).

As we think of Israel we can't help but wonder at their specific failures. Would they have excused their behavior as no more than seeking to survive? Perhaps. Israel had “spurned the good” (v. 3), or in this case the best, which is often our way. They had done so with wrong kings (8:4), wrong religion (4-6 and 13), wrong (faithless) foreign policy (8:7-10) and greediness for material things (8:14).

Recently in Texas, we saw a first. In an attempt to thwart a perceived detrimental redistricting plan, many of our State senators skipped town to make their way across the river to Oklahoma. Now, knowing I run the risk of offending some with this (but please allow me as this is not an illustration in favor or not of their opinions), I can't help but wonder at this trek across the Red.

It reminded me of when my sisters and I would get caught at something growing up, and how one of us would always “slink away” or “join with another” just as Mom was calling us into account. It never worked!

The “rivers” were not wide enough, and our “alliances” would be found out. Eventually, we'd be brought in to face the music. Even a “Map Room” on our own turf could be turned into the “court of God.” How much better to obey willingly than by compulsion.

Questions for discussion

Does God bring charges against us in our time?

How do you think Israel's sins might compare with the sins of God's people today? Can we be religious and lack faithfulness and kindness and have no intimacy with God?

If we can, how might we do this?

How do you think God's charges against Israel relate to the personal experience of Hosea?