HOSEA
of
Palm
Sunday
between
Tabernacles
and
Passover.
Such
processions
were
not
peculiar
to
Tabernacles.
They
might
be
extemporized
for
other
occasions
of
a
joyous
character
(cf.
1
Mao
13*',
2
Mac
10'),
and
this
was
the
case
in
the
scene
described
in
the
Gospels.
In
its
transliterated
form
the
word
'
Hosanna'
passed
over
into
early
Mturgical
(esp.
doxological)
use
(cf.
e.g.
Didache
10=
'
Hosanna
to
the
God
of
David
')
,
as
an
inter-jection
of
praise
and
joy,
and
was
developed
on
these
lines.
The
early
misunderstanding
of
Its
real
meaning
was
perpetuated.
But
the
history
of
this
development
lies
outside
the
range
of
purely
Biblical
archaeology.
G.
H.
Box.
HOSEA.'
—
The
name
of
the
prophet
Hosea,
though
distinguished
by
the
English
translators,
is
identical
with
that
of
the
last
king
of
Israel
and
with
the
original
name
of
Joshua;
in
these
cases
it
appears
in
the
EV
as
Hoshea.
Hosea,
the
son
of
Beeri,
is
the
only
prophet,
among
those
whose
writings
have
survived,
who
was
himself
a
native
of
the
Northern
Kingdom.
The
main
subject
of
the
prophecy
of
Amos
is
the
Northern
Kingdom,
but
Amos
himself
was
a
native
of
the
South;
so
also
were
Isaiah
and
Micah,
and
these
two
prophets,
though
they
included
the
Northern
King-dom
in
their
denunciations,
devoted
themselves
mainly
to
Judah.
Hosea's
prophetic
career
extended
from
shortly
before
the
fall
of
the
house
of
Jeroboam
ii.
(c.
e.g.
746)
to
shortly
before
the
outbreak
of
the
Syro-Ephraimitish
war
in
B.C.
735
—
a
period
of
rapidly
advancing
decay
following
on
the
success
and
prosperity
of
the
reign
of
Jeroboam
ii.
He
began
to
prophesy
within
some
10
or
15
years
of
the
prophetic
activity
of
Amos
at
Bethel,
and
continued
to
do
so
till
some
years
after
Isaiah
had
made
his
voice
heard
and
his
influence
felt
in
the
Southern
Kingdom.
Influenced
himself
probably
by
Amos,
he
seems
to
have
exercised
some
influence
over
Isaiah;
but
these
conclusions
must
rest
on
a
com-parison
of
the
writings
of
the
three
prophets.
Our
direct
knowledge
of
Hosea
is
derived
entirely
from
the
book
which
bears
his
name;
he
is
mentioned
nowhere
else
in
the
OT.
If
the
account
given
in
the
1st
and
3rd
chapters
of
Hosea
were
allegory,
as
many
ancient
and
some
modem
interpreters
have
held,
our
knowledge
of
Hosea
would
be
slight
indeed.
But
since
these
chapters
are
clearly
not
allegorical,
there
are
few
prophets
whose
spiritual
experience
is
better
known
to
us.
In
favour
of
an
allegorical
interpretation
the
clearly
symbolical
character
of
the
names
of
Hosea's
children
has
been
urged;
but
the
names
of
Isaiah's
children
—
Shear-jashub
and
Maher-shalal-hash-baz
—
are
also
symbolical
(cf.
Is
8").
Moreover,
if
the
narrative
were
allegorical,
there
would
be
just
as
much
reason
for
the
names
of
Hosea's
wife
and
her
father
as
for
the
names
of
the
children
being
symbolical;
on
the
other
hand,
in
real
Ufe
it
was
within
the
power
of
the
prophet
to
give
symboUcal
names
to
the
children,
but
not
to
his
wife
or
her
father.
The
names
of
Hosea's
wife,
Gomer,
and
her
father,
Diblaim
are
not
symbolical.
Further,
the
reference
to
the
weaning
of
Lo-ruhamah
in
1'
is
purposeless
in
allegory,
but
natural
enough
in
real
life,
since
it
serves
to
fix
the
interval
between
the
birth
of
the
two
children.
The
command
in
1*
has
seemed
to
some,
and
may
well
seem,
if
prophetic
methods
of
expression
are
for-gotten,
impossible
except
in
allegory.
It
is
as
well,
therefore,
to
approach
the
important
narrative
of
Hosea
with
a
recollection
of
such
a
method
of
describing
experience
as
is
illustrated
by
Jer
18'-*.
This
describes
a
perfectly
familiar
scene.
The
incident,
translated
out
of
prophetic
language,
is
as
follows.
On
an
impulse
Jeremiah
one
day
went
down
to
watch,
as
he
must
often
have
watched
before,
a
potter
at
his
work;
but
on
this
particular
day
the
potter's
work
taught
him
a
new
lesson.
Then
he
recognized
(1)
that
the
impulse
that
had
led
him
that
day
was
from
Jahweh,
and
(2)
that
HOSEA
the
new
suggestion
of
the
potter's
wheel
was
a
word
from
Jahweh.
So
again,
Jer
32'"-
describes
what
we
should
term
a
presentiment;
after
it
was
reaUzed,
it
was
recognized
to
have
been
a
word
from
Jahweh
(Jer
32*).
Interpreted
in
the
light
of
these
illustra-tions
of
prophetic
methods
of
speech,
the
narrative
of
Hosea
1
gives
us
an
account
of
the
experience
of
Hosea,
as
follows.
Driven
by
true
love
in
which,
prob-ably
enough,
Hosea
at
the
time
felt
the
approval,
not
to
say
the
direct
impulse
of
Jahweh,
Hosea
married
Gomer,
the
daughter
of
Diblaim.
After
marriage
she
proved
unfaithful,
and
Hosea
heard
that
the
woman
whom
he
had
been
led
by
Jahweh
to
marry
had
had
within
her
all
along
the
tendency
to
unfaithfulness.
She
was
not
at
the
time
of
marriage
an
actual
harlot,
but,
had
Hosea
only
fuUy
understood,
he
would
have
known
when
he
married
her,
as
these
years
afterwards
he
has
come
to
know,
that
when
Jahweh
said,
'Go,
marry
Gomer,'
He
was
really
saying
'
Go,
marry
a
woman
who
will
bestow
her
love
on
others.'
His
new,
sad
knowl-edge
does
not
make
him
feel
less
but
more
that
his
marriage
had
been
ordered
of
God.
Not
only
through
the
love
of
youth,
but
even
more
through
the
conflict
and
the
treachery
and
the
ill-return
which
his
love
has
received,
Jahweh
is
speaking.
Had
Hosea
spoken
just
hke
Jeremiah,
he
might
have
continued:
'Then
I
dis-covered
that
my
wife
had
played
the
harlot,
and
that
my
children
were
not
mine.
Then
I
knew
that
this
was
the
word
of
Jahweh,
and
Jahweh
said
unto
me:
Even
as
the
bride
of
thy
youth
has
played
the
harlot,
even
so
has
My
bride,
Israel,
played
the
harlot:
even
as
thy
children
are
children
of
harlotry,
even
so
are
the
children
of
Israel
children
of
harlotry,
sons
of
the
Baals
whom
they
worship.'
Apparently
Hosea
reached
the
conclusion
that
none
of
the
children
were
his;
he
calls
them
without
exception
'children
of
harlotry'
(1").
But
the
name
Jezreel
(1*)
certainly
does
not
suggest
that
at
the
birth
of
his
first-
born
he
was
already
aware
of
his
wife's
unfaithfulness,
the
name
of
the
second,
Lo-ruhamah
('
Not
pitied,'
1'),
does
not
prove
it,
and
even
that
of
the
third
child,
Lo-ammi
('Not
my
kinsman,'
1'),
may
merely
carry
further
the
judgment
on
the
nation
expressed
unques-tionably
In
the
first
and
probably
in
the
second.
In
any
case
we
may
somewhat
safely
infer
that
Hosea
became
a
prophet
before
he
had
learned
his
wife's
un-faithfulness,
and
that
in
his
earnest
preaching
he,
like
Amos,
denounced
inhumanity
as
offensive
to
God;
for
this
is
the
purpose
of
the
name
Jezreel;
the
house
of
Jehu,
established
by
means
of
bloodshed
and
inhumanity
(1'),
is
about
to
be
punished.
'Kindness
not
sacrifice'
(6*)
must
have
been
the
ideal
of
reUgion
which
from
the
first
Hosea
held
up
before
his
people.
It
has
generally
been
inferred
that
Hosea's
wife
subsequently
left
him
(or
that
he
put
her
away),
but
that
at
last
in
his
love
for
her,
which
could
not
be
quenched,
he
rescued
her
from
the
life
of
shame
into
which
she
had
sunk
(eh
3)
.
And
this
perhaps
remains
most
probable,
though
Marti
has
lately
argued
with
much
abiUty
(1)
that
ch.
3
does
not
refer
to
Gomer,
(2)
that,
unUke
ch.
1,
ch.
3
Is
allegorical,
and
(3)
that
ch.
3
formed
no
part
of
the
original
Book
of
Hosea.
Be
this
as
it
may,
it
is
clear
that
although
the
circum-stances
of
Hosea's
married
life
were
not
the
cause
of
his
becoming
a
prophet,
they
do
explain
certain
peculiar
characteristics
of
his
message
and
personaUty:
his
in-sistence
on
the
love
of
God
for
Israel,
and
on
Israel's
sin
as
consisting
in
the
want
of
love
and
of
loyalty
towards
God;
and
the
greater
emotional
element
that
marks
him
as
compared
with
Amos.
At
the
same
time,
it
is
important
not
to
exaggerate
the
difference
between
Amos
and
Hosea,
of
to
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
Hosea
not
less
than
Amos
or
Isaiah
or
Micah
insisted
on
the
worthlessness
of
religion
or
of
devotion
to
Jahweh
which
was
not
ethical
(.Jezreel,
1';
6").
In
considering
the
greater
sympathy
of
Hosea
with
the
