Hosea–Jonah (Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 31 | WBC)

Just read through the Jonah portion of this commentary & it's excellent! Of the commentaries I've read by Douglas Stuart, they've all been top-shelf!

I would normally not comment in one of the top of the list of Bestcommentaries. There are better opinions than mine available but having gone until Hos 9:9 with it I think it is important some notes for somebody that wants to take a deep devotional reading. And its in doubt how to expend scarce resources: The Commentary is excellent, it gives rich connection with Leviticus and Deuteronomy, taking the point of view of Covenant keeping/violation. There are some connexions with Isaiah, but its strength is in the law. If you intent to cover the 12 as a unit there are very few and wide spaced links to the rest, it basically is not suitable for this. There are red flags in theology, for this use extreme caution when relying in interpretation. I do not write this lightly. 2 examples so far: Commentary on Hos 8:1-14 “What in fact has Israel done? Five sorts of sins are specifically cited: (1) the refusal to acknowledge Yahweh’s right of divine ordination of the king (v 4); (2) idolatry (vv 4b–6); (3) dependence on international allies rather than on Yahweh (vv 9–10); (4) a corrupt cult (vv 5, 6, 11, 13); and (5) arrogant disregard for the law of their God (vv 1, 2–3a, 5b, 12, 14). Because both sovereign and vassal were bound to the terms of the covenant, Yahweh must punish Israel for their manifold disobedience.” (p. 138). I do not have problems with an argument for justice, but the suggestion that YHWH MUST do something under compulsion of the creature should not be taken. Having read the rest of the commentary that’s the meaning, all the time the discussion is of the obligations of both parties under the covenant, its not that Justice or Truthfulness of God is discussed and under this understanding the unfortunate phrase takes place. Commentary on Hos 9:1-9. “It should not be surprising that Hosea’s message fell mostly upon deaf ears. Such a response is predictable when hard words from God are proclaimed where they have not been invited. For the Christian, to whom Christ promises special help in the face of hostility, the preaching of the divine message may result in far worse distress than being mocked (cf. Luke 21:12–17). Few Israelites stood with Hosea against the prevailing injustices and degradations. He at least stood firm even when his very sanity was questioned. Only by likewise standing firm with Christ may Christians expect to be delivered by God from the punishments prescribed by the new covenant’s curses (Luke 21:18–19).” (p. 148). With this second one I definitively have Issues. Is this a suggestion that the salvation can be lost if you don’t endure tribulation? I hope the verse is an unfortunate selection by the author, but still is a bad link, if you were to say Luke 6:46–49 or 1 Corinthians 10:5-14 would be an issue of disbelief or apostasy, no problem with this, but as it stands its really bad theology the implication. So my recommendation, read it by all means, but NOT ALONE and DON’T TAKE anything that is labelled “covenant” form it. My suggestion? Pick alongside https://www.logos.com/product/3393/grace-abounding-a-commentary-on-the-book-of-hosea and read it ahead section by section. Solid theology, exalted view of God along the lines of Jer 9:24. A sample of what to expect from this: You become what you love, or what you worship, says the prophet. You are a reflection of your “sacred.” That to which you give priority and which you make your absolute, that which establishes your norms and values, that which tells you what is good and true and beautiful is what determines your identity and tells you who you are. But what if the thing you worship is a “nothing,” a creation of your own imagination or lusts, like the Baals for instance? […] As usual the punishment is made to fit the crime—and more. Ephraim (or “Ephraim’s glory”) is likened to a flock of birds which flies away. The “glory” is obviously in contrast with the “shame” in 9:10. I prefer therefore to take “glory” as indicating Yahweh himself. Yahweh leaves, and what is the result? Granted the current beliefs about the power of the Baals, the one area Ephraim would expect not to be affected was that of birth, pregnancy, and conception. These were the Baals’ responsibility, not Yahweh’s, so his absence surely would make no difference to them. The reality is the reverse. Fertility is Yahweh’s domain (like everything else); when Yahweh leaves, fertility ceases. This is the unwelcome, totally unexpected harvest of punishment. […] With God’s departure would come the end of their history, the end of fertility, and the end of life itself because he is the living God, the giver of life. (pp. 121–122).