Глава 3

1. God's command to the prophet. 2–3. Fulfillment of the command of the prophet. 4–5. Symbolic meaning of prophetic actions. Os.3:1. And the Lord said to me: Go again, and love a woman who is loved by her husband, but who commits adultery, just as the Lord loves the children of Israel, and they turn to other gods and love their grape cakes. With a new symbolic action, the prophet foreshadows Jehovah's forgiveness of the criminal people. “And the Lord said to me: Go again and love the woman loved by her husband, but committing adultery.” The meaning of the command received by the prophet is understood differently. Many exegetes (Hengstenberg, Keil, Scholz) see in Art. 1 is about the second marriage of the prophet with another woman unknown by name. It is assumed that Gomer either died or received a divorce. But most commentators mean by the woman whom the prophet is commanded to love, the one named in Chapter I. wife of the prophet Gomer. This understanding is based on the following considerations: a) If the woman about whom the prophet speaks was different from Gomer, then the prophet would have reported more definite information about her, just as he did in Hosea 1.3. b) True, the word ischah, wife in Hosea 3.1 does not have a member, which arouses bewilderment when this word is attributed to a person mentioned earlier and known to the reader; but an example of such prolapse of the penis in the prophet Hosea occurs more than once (cf. Hos 5.11 acharej zav “by establishment” Hos 4.11 ikkah lev, take possession of the heart; with the words zav and lev one would expect a member here). c) From the context it is clear that with a symbolic action the prophet wants to point out the immutability of God’s love for Israel, despite the latter’s betrayal and infidelity. The thought of this will be expressed only if under the wife in Art. 1 to understand Gomer, who betrayed the prophet and was still loved by him. d) A woman is said to be loved by her husband, Heb. achubath rea, own. loved by a friend (v. loving evil, since LXX instead of rea they read ra worthlessness). In this place, rea can mean lover or husband (cf. Jer 3.1,20; Song 5.16). Since it is noted about a woman beloved by rea that she “commits adultery” (and does not commit fornication), then, apparently, by rea, whose fidelity is violated, we must understand the husband. So, a woman is loved by her husband. At the same time, the prophet is commanded to love a woman. Without a doubt, the prophet could not have been given the command to appropriate someone else's wife and violate the sanctity of someone else's marriage. Therefore, it must be concluded that the prophet is commanded to love his wife, i.e. that by woman in OS 3.1 we mean the one mentioned in Chapter. 1 wife of the prophet Gomer. The meaning of the command “love a woman” is not entirely clear. But this command cannot be understood in the sense of a command to get married, since the term lakach eschschah, to take a wife, is usually used in the VZ to denote the conclusion of a marriage union. In addition, the idea of ​​a second marriage of the prophet is excluded by the fact that neither Gomer’s death nor her divorce is mentioned. In view of the above, in the command to love a woman one should see only an indication “of a new episode from the history of the marriage of the prophet with Gomer” (Brodovich). It must be assumed that Gomer not only broke her marriage with the prophet, but also left him completely in order to indulge in her vicious inclinations with greater freedom. Now the prophet receives the command to “love her again,” that is, to find her, testify to her again his love and “renew signs of love” (Kurtz, Novak, Rougemont, Brodovich). - “They love their grape cakes” asihischej anavim, famous: “boils with currants”, πέμματα μετά σταιριδος, cookies with raisins: probably these cookies were sacrificed to idols and used for sacrificial meals. Hos.3:2. And I bought it for myself for fifteen pieces of silver and for a homer of barley and half a homer of barley. Hos.3:3. and he said to her: stay with me many days; do not commit fornication, and do not be with another; I will do the same for you. In Art. 2 and 3 report the prophet’s fulfillment of God’s command. It is not entirely clear what the prophet actually did. Heb. vaekreha (Russian “and acquired”), translated differently by commentators (Abei - Ezra - “acquainted”, Umbreit, Hitzig, Novak - “bought”, Keil, Scholz - “acquired”, Kurtz - “agreed”) is better understood together with LXX in the sense hired (έμισθωσάμην), agreed. Apparently, before resuming marital relations with Gomer, the prophet assigned her a kind of penance in order to correct her and strengthen her in goodness: namely, for a certain time, Gomer had to refrain from all sexual intercourse. At the same time, the prophet gave his wife the means of subsistence, but very meager means (in order to strengthen in her the idea of ​​​​the need for humility), namely barley, from which the worst bread was prepared, and a small amount of money (in Greek and Slavic, even “not enough wine”). These funds were given specifically to the wife, and not to her parents or lover as a ransom, as some commentators suggest (Scholz, Knabenb., Ewald, Novak): the existence of the Jewish custom of buying wives from parents or relatives cannot be proven, and the assumption that the prophet entered into a deal with his wife’s lover is unnatural. “I will also be for you,” that is, the prophet will have the same relationship with his wife as she should have with other men, in other words, he will not have sexual intercourse with her. Hos.3:4. For for a long time the children of Israel will remain without a king and without a prince and without a sacrifice, without an altar, without an ephod and without a teraphim. In Art. 4th explains the symbolic action of the prophet. Like Gomer, Israel in captivity would be deprived of civil government and service to Jehovah. At the same time, he will leave the idols in disgust. "Without Altar". Heb. mazzebah from nazab to put, – means own. pillar, statue, monument made of stones. Such pillars were used by the pagans in honor of Baal (Exodus 23.24; 2 Kings 3.2), and among the Jews they were dedicated to Jehovah (Gen. 28.18, 22, 35.14). By the Law of Moses, mazzeboth, due to their use among the Canaanites, were prohibited (Exodus 23.24, 34.18; Lev.26:1; Deut. 7.5, etc.). But nevertheless, they were widespread both in the people of Israel and in the Kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 14.23; 2 Kings 17.10, 18.4, etc.). "Ephod and teraphim" glory. “neither the priesthood, nor the manifestation”: ephod - the high priestly outer garment, on which a breastplate with the Urim and Thumim was worn; teraphim - humanoid idols depicting household gods. Teraphim were considered oracle gods, to whom the people turned to predict the future (Eze 21.26; Zech 10.2; cf. Judges 17:1). LXX euro The teraphim understood it as an indication of the Urim and Thummim and therefore translated the words. δήξοι, slav. "phenomena". Hos.3:5. After this the children of Israel will turn and seek the Lord their God and David their king, and they will revere the Lord and His goodness in the last days. The prophet speaks of the consequences of Israel's punishment. Just as the falling away from Jehovah was accompanied by the separation of Israel from the house of David, so the turning to Jehovah will be accompanied by reunification with David. The words “in the last days”, which in prophetic speeches usually designate the messianic time (Isa 2.2; Eze 38.8; Jer 30.24, etc.), show that by David the prophet does not mean the royal family of David, but the great descendant of David - the Messiah. Slav.: “they will wonder about the Lord” εκστήσονται, means: they will revere, tremble before the Lord. Ch. I-III contain a description of the symbolic action of the prophet. Was this symbolic action performed? There are three opinions on this issue in the exegetical literature. Some commentators accept the prophet's story as a literary device, parable, or allegory to express a known truth; others believe ch. I-III by a description of what the prophet experienced only in the spirit, in spiritual contemplation or vision; still others, finally, believe that the prophet talks about the facts of external reality, about the symbolic action that was performed. The first understanding (allegorical) of the most famous exegetes is defended by Rosenmüller, Hitzig, Wünsche, Goonaker; from Russian Smirnov; the second (visionary) was expressed by Blessed. Jerome, then shared by the entire Origen school, Jewish interpreters, and in modern times defended by Hengstenberg and Keil; third (realistic) understanding of ch. I-III in ancient times had St. Kirill, blessed Theodoret, and in modern times - Kurtz, Shegg, Novak, Cheyne and others, Russian commentators - Bishop. Palladium, Brodovich and Yavorsky. Visionary understanding of the chapters in question. Hoshii currently has no defenders and can be rejected without hesitation. For the prophet’s internal experience of his tributary story, no goal can be specified, and the very process of this experience is incomprehensible. It is more difficult to make a choice between the other two understandings of Ch. I-III allegorical and realistic, since each of them can establish more or less solid foundations for itself in the prophet’s brief narrative. In favor of the realistic interpretation adopted in our literature (Brodovich, Yavorsky), the following main reasons are usually given: 1) the prophet nowhere gives instructions that he is telling a parable and not a story about actual events; Hos 3:1, 2, 3, 6, 8; Os 3.1–3 receive a satisfactory meaning only when interpreted in the literal sense. 2) If we assume that the story I-III ch. represents a parable, but in reality the prophet either was not married at all, or was happily married, then the prophet’s story about himself, not corresponding to the reality well known to the listeners, should have made a strange impression on the latter and caused only bewilderment. 3) In favor of the literal interpretation, one can also point out that the name of the main character, Gomer, cannot be interpreted in an allegorical sense: if Ch. I-III presented a parable or generally a fictional story, then, naturally, it would be expected that the main character bears a name of a symbolic nature - a name that clearly corresponds in its meaning to the purpose of the story. In turn, allegorists, not without sufficient grounds, can put forward the following in favor of their interpretation: 1) The form of the narrative in itself does not indicate what is described in Chapter. I-III was actually fulfilled by the prophet, since, undoubtedly, not all symbolic actions were fulfilled (cf. Jer 25.15). 2) When interpreting ch. I, in the sense of narrating a historical fact, it is psychologically incomprehensible that the prophet fulfilled the command of God: it is strange to assume that the prophet, when entering into a marriage, should have been guided by the foreknowledge that a certain woman would be a harlot and have illegitimate children. 3) With an allegorical understanding of Ch. I-III, the discrepancy between certain features of real life cannot cause bewilderment, since in a parable or allegory, deviations from reality are quite possible. 4) If we accept Ch. I-III parables, then the prophet’s sermon will represent something integral; If, however, we see in the chapters under consideration an indication of the fact of the real life of the prophet, then his sermon will be divided into a number of separate moments, separated by a significant period of time, that is, it will lose its integrity and the power of impression. Given the brevity of the narrative of the prophet Hosea and the controversial nature of many individual expressions in ch. I-III, it is difficult to decisively give preference to any of the above interpretations. But will we explain Ch. I-III in an allegorical sense, or considered as a description of actual facts from the life of the prophet, the general meaning of the prophet’s denunciations and predictions is clear, and it remains unchanged under both interpretations. You might be interested in: