¹tn The phrase “to Baal” does not appear in the Hebrew text here, but is implied; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.
²tn Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
³tc The referent of the 3cpl verb WrB=D] (dibb^eru, “they speak”) is the masculine singular noun El#M#h^w+ (v^ehammelekh, “a king” in v. 3) which is used generically, representing all human kings of Israel to which the 3cpl verb refers. Although this is a bit syntactically awkward, it is not necessary to emend the MT to the 3ms verb form rb^D* (davar, “he speaks”) as the BHS editors suggest. The LXX , however, reads the singular form lalw'n (lalwn, “uttering”).
⁴tn Heb “they speak words.” The cognate accusative construction <yr]b*d+ WrB=D] (dibb^eru d^evarim; literally, “they speak words”) is an idiom that means “they speak mere words” or “they utter empty words,” that is, they make empty promises (e.g., Isa 58:13; BDB 180-181 s.v. rb^D* 2). The immediately following collocated phrase aw+v* tola* (’alot shav^e’, “swearing an empty oath”) confirms this nuance. The LXX understood this idiom in the same way: lalw'n rJhvmata profavseia" yeudei'" (lalwn r{hmata profaseias yeudeis, “speaking false professions as his words”).
⁵tn The two infinitive absolutes tola* (’alot, Qal infinitive absolute from II hl*a*, ’alah, “to swear an oath”; BDB 46 s.v. II hl*a*) and tr)K* (karot, Qal infinitive absolute from tr^K*, karat, “to make [a covenant]”; BDB 503 s.v. tr^K* 4), which appear without conjunctions, continue the description of the action of the preceding finite verb WrB=D] (dibb^eru, Piel perfect 3cpl from rb^D*, davar, “to speak”). Although the infinitives continue the description of the action of the finite verb, they call special attention to the action of the infinitive rather than the action of the finite verb. See IBHS 35.5.2.b.
⁶tn The word “empty” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied. It is supplied in the translation for clarity.
⁷tn The noun II var) (ro’sh) refers to a “poisonous plant” (Deut 29:17; Hos 10:4) or “bitter herb” (Ps 69:22; Lam 3:5; BDB 912 s.v. var) 1; HALOT 1167 s.v. var) 1).
⁸tc The MT reads the singular construct noun /k^v= (sh^ekhan, “the inhabitant [of Samaria]”), while the LXX and Syriac reflect the plural construct noun yn}k^v= (sh^ekhane, “the inhabitants [of Samaria]”). The singular noun may be a collective referring to the population of Samaria as a whole (BDB 1015 s.v. /k@v*; e.g., Isa 33:24). Most English translations view this as a reference to the inhabitants of the city as a whole (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NJPS, TEV, CEV).
⁹tc The MT reads WrWgy` (yaguru, Qal imperfect 3cpl from III rWg, gur, “to dread”; see BDB 159 s.v. III rWg 1). This is syntactically awkward because III rWg (“to dread”) is used nowhere else with the preposition l= (lamed, “they are in dread for…”?). BDB suggests reading WdWny` (yanudu, Qal imperfect 3cpl from dWn, nud, “to lament”; BDB 626 s.v. dWn 2.a) which harmonizes better with the parallelism with lb^a* (’aval, “to mourn”) in the following line. The verb dWn (“to lament”) is used with the preposition l= in the idiom “to lament for” (e.g., Isa 51:19; Jer 15:5; 16:5; 48:17; Nah 3:7). This involves simple orthographic confusion between g (gimel) and n (nun), as well as r (resh) and d (dalet) which were often confused by the scribes.
¹⁰tc The MT reads the plural tolg+u#l= (l^e’eglot, “for the calves”), while some Greek versions (LXX, Theodotion) and the Syriac reflect the singular lg#u@l= (“for the calf [calf idol]”) The singular reading is preferred on the basis of internal evidence: the oracle denounces the calf idol worship of Samaria. The plural form probably arose due to the ambiguity of the term “calf” when a scribe did not realize that the term was being used as a metonymy for the worship of the Egyptian calf goddess. Most English translations adopt the singular form and relate it to the calf goddess cult (RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, TEV, CEV); however, older translations follow the MT plural (KJV).
¹¹sn See the note on the place name Beth-Aven in 4:15.
¹²tc The MT appears to read Wlyg]y` (yagilu, “they will rejoice”; Qal imperfect 3mpl from lyG], gil, “to rejoice”), but this is likely an example of semantic polarization. See F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Hosea (AB), 556-67. The BHS editors propose the reading Wlyl!y}y+ (y<sup>e</sup>yelilu, “they will lament”; Hiphil imperfect 3mpl from ll^y`, yalal, “to lament”), which also appears in Hos 7:14. If this reading is original, the textual variant may be attributed to: (1) orthographic confusion between l (lamed) and g (gimel), and (2) haplography or dittography of y (yod). English translations are split; some follow the MT (KJV, NIV, NJPS, CEV), others the proposed emendation (RSV, NASB, TEV).
¹³tc This line division follows the MT rather than the line division suggested by the BHS editors.
¹⁴tn Heb “from it.”
¹⁵tn The antecedent of the 3ms direct object pronoun otoa (’oto, “it”) is probably the calf idol of Beth-Aven mentioned in 10:5a. This has been specified in the translation for clarity.
¹⁶tc The MT reads br@y` El#m# (melekh yarev, “a king who contends”?) which is syntactically awkward: El#m# (“king”) followed by br@y` (“let him contend!”; Qal jussive 3ms from byr], riv, “to contend”). The MT is probably guilty of faulty word division. As the BHS editors suggest, the original reading most likely is br* yK!l=m^ (malki rav, “the great king”). The suffixed y (yod) on yK!l=m^ is the remnant of the old genitive ending. This is the equivalent of the Assyrian royal epithet sarru rabbu (“the great king”).
¹⁷tn The preposition /m! (min) functions in a causal sense specifying the logical cause: “because of” or “on account of” (e.g., Exod 2:23; Deut 7:7; Nah 3:4; BDB 580 s.v. /m! 2.f; HALOT 598 s.v. /m! 6).
¹⁸tn The meaning of the root of otx*u&m@ (me’atsato, preposition /m!, min, + fs noun hx*u@, ’etsah, + 3ms suffix) is debated. There are three options: (1) “its counsel” from I hx*u@ (“counsel; advice; plan”; BDB 420 s.v. hx*u@; HALOT 867 s.v. I hx*u@ 3.a); (2) “its disobedience” from II hx*u@ (“disobedience,” but the existence of this root is debated; see HALOT 867 s.v. II hx*u@); and (3) “its wooden idol” from III hx*u@ (“wood”; cf. Jer 6:6) referring to the wooden idol/effigy (calf idol in 10:5), a stick of wood covered with gold (HALOT 867 s.v.). The last option is favored contextually: (a) the idol is called “a stick of wood” in Hosea 4:12, and (b) the calf idol (probably the referent) of the cult is mentioned in 10:5. The translations are split: (1) “his idol” (RSV, NRSV), “its wooden idols” (NIV), “image” (NJPS margin), “that idol” (CEV); and (2) “his own counsel” (KJV), “its own counsel” (NASB), “his plans” (NJPS), “advice” (TEV).
¹⁹tn The term hm#d+n] (nidmeh, Niphal participle fs) is derived from II hm*d* (damah; so BDB 198 s.v. hm*d*; HALOT 225 s.v. III hmd): “be cut off, cease to exist, be destroyed.” The Niphal form hm#d+n] (“will be destroyed”) is paralleled by the Niphal Wdm=v=n]w+ (v^enishm^edu, “will be destroyed”) in 10:8. Several translations nuance the literal wording for the sake of the idiom: “will float away like a twig on the surface of water” (NIV), “like a twig in a stream…will be swept away” (CEV), “will be carried off like a chip of wood on water” (TEV).
²⁰tn The noun II [x#q# (qetsef) is a hapax legomenon (a term that occurs only once). Historically, it has been understood in two different ways: (1) “foam” (Vulgate, Aquila, Symmachus) and (2) “snapped-off twig” (LXX, Theodotion, Syriac Peshitta). Both interpretations make sense in the light of the simile. The latter has more support because of the related verb Jx^q* (qatsats, “to cut off, chop off”) used in reference to wood (BDB 893 s.v. Jx^q*; HALOT 1125 s.v. Jxq) and the related feminine noun hp*x*q= (q^etsafah, “stump; splinter” of fig-tree; BDB 893 s.v. hp*x*q=; HALOT 1125 s.v. hp*x*q=). Translations differ along these lines: (1) “foam” (KJV, NJPS) and (2) “chip” (RSV, TEV), “stick” (NASB), “twig” (NIV, CEV).
²¹tn Alternately, “Aven” for the city name “Beth-Aven.” The term “Beth” (house) does not appear in the Hebrew text here, but is implied (e.g., Hos 4:15). It is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.
²²tc The MT reads /w\a* tomB* (bamot ’aven, “high places of Aven”); however, several Hebrew mss read /w\a* tyB@ tomB* (bamot bet ’aven, “high places of Beth-Aven”). In Hosea 4:15 the name /w\a* tyB@ (“Beth-Aven”; Heb “house of wickedness”) is a wordplay on “Bethel” (Heb “house of God”). It is possible that /w\a* tyB@ tomB* (“high places of Beth-Aven”) was original: tyB@ (bet, “house”) dropped out as an unintentional scribal error by haplography due to presence of the consonants tb in the preceding word twmb (bamot, “high places”).
tn Heb “high places of wickedness” (/w\a* tomB*, bamot ’aven). The noun /w\a* (“wickedness”) is an attributive genitive: “wicked high places.”
²³tn Heb “days.”
²⁴tn Heb “in my desire.”
²⁵tc The MT reads <r@S(a#w+ (v^e’essorem, vav conjunction + Niphal imperfect 1cs + 3mpl suffix from rs^a*, ’asar, “to bind”). The LXX reads paideu'sai aujtouv" (paideusai autous, “to discipline them”) which reflects a Vorlage of <r#S^ya! (’issarem, Qal imperfect 1cs + 3mpl suffix from rs^y`, yasar, “to discipline”; BDB 416 s.v. rs^y` 3). The textual variant was caused by orthographic confusion between w (vav) and y (yod) with metathesis of the two letters.
²⁶tn Heb “Nations will be gathered together against them.”
²⁷tn The verb rs^a* (’asar, “to bind”) often refers to conquered peoples being bound as prisoners (BDB 63 s.v. rs^a*). Here it is used figuratively to describe the Israelites being taken into exile.
²⁸tc The Kethib is <t*n{yu@ yT@v=l! (lishte ’enotam, “for their two eyes”), while the Qere reads <t*n{ou yT@v=l! (lishte ’onotam, “for their two sins”). The phrase “two sins” could refer to (1) the sinful episode at Gibeah and the subsequent war between the tribe of Benjamin and the other tribes (Judges 19-21), or (2) the entire Gibeah incident (Judges 19-21) and Israel’s subsequent failure to repent up to the time of Hosea: “the time of Gibeah” (first sin) and “there you have remained” (second sin).
²⁹tc The MT is unintelligible: bWf-lu^ (’al-tuv, “upon a fine [thing]”?). The BHS editors suggest the revocalization bWf-lu) (’ol-tuv, “a fine yoke”). The noun lu) (’ol, “yoke”) also appears in 11:4 in a metaphor which compares Israel to a young heifer as well.
³⁰tn Or “Judah will plow.”
³¹tn Or “Jacob will break up.”
³²tn Or “righteousness.”
³³tc The MT reads the enigmatic ;K=r+d^B= (b^edark^ekha, “in your own way”) which does not seem to fit the context or the parallelism with ;yr#oBG] br)B= (b^erov gibborekha, “in your multitude of warriors”). The BHS editors suggest the original reading was ;B=k=r]b= (v^erikhb^ekha, “in your chariots”). If this is correct, the textual corruption was caused by orthographic confusion between bk#r# (rekhev, “chariot”) and kr#D# (derekh, “way”).
³⁴tn The phrase “you have relied” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the parallelism in the preceding line.
³⁵tn Heb “as the devastation of Shalman.” The genitive noun /m^l=v^ (shalman, “Shalman”) functions as a subjective genitive: “as Shalman devastated [Beth Arbel].”
³⁶map For location see Map4-G4; Map5-C1; Map6-E3; Map7-D1; Map8-G3.
³⁷tn Heb “when the dawn is cut off” or “when the day ceases.”
³⁸tn The root hm*d* (damah, “to be cut off, cease to exist, be destroyed”; BDB 198 s.v. hm*d*; HALOT 225 s.v. hmd) is repeated in the Hebrew text. The form hm)d+n] (nidmoh, Niphal infinitive absolute) appears in the first colon, and the form hm*d+n] (nidmah, Niphal perfect 3ms) appears in the second colon. This striking repetition creates a dramatic wordplay: “The moment the dawn ceases to exist (i.e., at the break of dawn), the king of Israel will cease to exist.”