Shittim

The Hebrew in Hosea 5:2 that is translated in various ways in English translations (see here ), including “sin,” “slaughter,” “deceitfulness,” “rebel,” and “Shittim” as a place name (see Numbers 25:1, 33:49, Joshua 2:21, 3:1, Joel 3:18, and Micah 6:5 for other references to the place name), is translated by the Good News Translation and the New Living Translation as “Acacia City (or: Valley).” “Shittim” is a word for the Acacia tree and the translators chose “Acacia” since “Shittim,” especially as part of “pit dug deep in Shittim” or similar resembles a rude expression in English, especially when read aloud. (Source: de Blois / Dorn / van Steenbergen / Thompson, 2020)

See also acacia.

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:1

The word of the LORD that came to Hosea …: This is a typical introductory verse to a prophetic book, although Hosea is not explicitly identified in the text as a prophet. The phrase The word of the LORD that came to also occurs in other prophetic books (see Joel 1.1; Micah 1.1; Zeph 1.1). We advise translators to use a standard formula for this type of opening sentence. This opening sentence gives the source of the message (the LORD), the messenger (in this case Hosea), and the time of the message. The time is shown by listing kings who ruled Israel and Judah while Hosea was a prophet.

The word of the LORD is the main topic in the sentence. Word does not refer to a single vocabulary item but to an entire “message” (Good News Translation). Since this statement serves as the title of the book in Hebrew, it refers to the whole book as a message from God, including Hosea’s unhappy life with his wife, as well as all the prophetic utterances in the book. If a literal translation of word conveys the sense of “message,” translators should keep it. If not, the plural form “words” is also acceptable.

Wherever the word LORD appears in capital letters in Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation and other English translations, the term represents the personal name of God. In Hebrew consonants the divine name is written as YHWH, so the Jerusalem Bible (Jerusalem Bible) renders it as “Yahweh,” which is one possible way in which the name was pronounced. The name YHWH is related to the Hebrew expression used by God when he said of himself “I AM WHO I AM” (Exo 3.14), and it may therefore mean “he is,” “he is the one who exists,” or “he is the one who causes all things to exist.” Many years later, especially after the Babylonian captivity, people were afraid to pronounce the name of God. They did not want to risk pronouncing God’s name “in vain” (Exo 20.7). And so it became a Jewish custom for a reader in the congregation to substitute God’s name with the Hebrew word for “my Lord” (ʾadonay), when they came to the name of God. (The form “Jehovah” is not correct, because it only mixes up the vowels of ʾadonay and the consonants of YHWH.) The name “Yahweh” can be transliterated, because it is usually seen as a proper name. However, it is important to consider the (church)tradition of the target audience and existing influential translations in the area. In some languages it may be better to use a general term such as “Lord” or “Master,” as in many English translations (for example, Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation). However, this term is a title and not a proper name. There are also translations that have used a traditional praise name that refers to the deity, for example, Chauta in Chewa, a major Bantu language of south-central Africa. The word Chauta literally means “Great-One-of-the-Bow,” probably the rainbow. The name is used in sermons, hymns, and prayers. It has positive emotive overtones since it refers to the God who “owns” and also “belongs” to them.

In this Handbook the word “LORD” in all capital letters will occur only when quoted. Elsewhere “Yahweh” will be used as an indication that the LORD is being referred to by his personal name. It will be up to each translation committee to decide how to express the divine name in their own language and culture.

In Hebrew The word of the LORD that came to is literally “The word of Yahweh that was/happened/occurred to,” which is an idiom that occurs almost exclusively in prophetic speech. Just as in this context, it usually refers to an oracle or revelation received from God.

The phrase Hosea son of Be-eri links Hosea with his father, as is common in Hebrew literature. The name Hosea means “he [or, Yahweh] has saved,” but we recommend transliterating the name as it is commonly known rather than translating it. His father Be-eri is not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament.

In the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel: People not acquainted with Bible history and geography could be confused by the list of kings and the two countries Judah and Israel. It may be necessary to say that the kings ruled one after another, so that the reader will not think of them as chiefs of tribes who were neighbors to each other; for example, the German common language version (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch) has “during the time when the kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah reigned after each other in Judah, while Jeroboam, the son of Joash, was the king in Israel.” It may also be necessary to make explicit that Judah was the kingdom to the south, while Israel was the kingdom to the north, and that together they were the twelve tribes; this means that they were all descendants of Jacob’s twelve sons, although it may be better to provide this information in a footnote if necessary, as does the French common language version (Bible en français courant) as follows:

Israel, set apart here from Judah, refers to the Israelite kingdom in the north, founded by Jeroboam I after the death of Solomon (see 1 Kgs 12.16-20). The king Jeroboam mentioned here is the second king with that name; he ruled over Israel from 787 to 747 B.C. (see 2 Kgs 14.23-29). – Uzziah: see the note at Amos 1.1. – Jotham: 2 Kgs 15.32-38; 2 Chr 27.1-3, 7-9. – Ahaz: 2 Kgs 16.1-20; 2 Chr 28.1-27. – Hezekiah: 2 Kgs 18–20; 2 Chr 29–32.

Translation models for this verse are:

• This is the revelation that Hosea the son of Beeri received from the LORD. It was during the time when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were kings in Judah, while Jeroboam the son of Joash was king of Israel.

• The message of the LORD that came to Hosea son of Beeri. At that time Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ruled as kings in Judah, and Jeroboam the son of Joash was king in Israel.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:2

When the LORD first spoke through Hosea is more literally “The beginning of the word of Yahweh by/to Hosea.” In the Hebrew text this clause appears as a separate paragraph and serves as the title for the entire section, not verse 2 only. We recommend showing this in the formatting of the translation; for example, the New Jerusalem Bible (New Jerusalem Bible) begins this verse with “The beginning of what Yahweh said through Hosea: ….” The Hebrew prepositional phrase for through Hosea can mean “to Hosea” or “by means of Hosea.” Here it probably indicates that Hosea was used as an instrument of Yahweh. Good News Translation adds the phrase “to Israel” for clarity.

The LORD said to Hosea is literally “and Yahweh spoke [or, said] to Hosea.” In the Hebrew text this clause begins the first narrative of the book. Revised Standard Version expresses it as the main clause to the previous one. In view of the comments on the previous clause, we suggest starting a new paragraph here, saying “The LORD said to him [Hosea].”

Go, take to yourself a wife of harlotry is a double command for a single action. Some languages will have similar double commands; for example, Chewa says “Go to marry….” Other languages will use a single command, such as “Marry….” Many languages will leave to yourself implicit since it is included in the act of marrying (so Good News Translation).

A wife of harlotry translates literally a Hebrew idiomatic expression that is ambiguous. The Hebrew phrase here describes the inner nature of the woman. She was inclined to prostitution (compare 4.12 and 5.4), not necessarily engaged in the activity at this point. Neither are we told how deeply the woman may have been involved in the Canaanite fertility cult. Was she a temple prostitute? Such activity was thought to encourage the fertility of crops, cattle, and people in the community. Had she merely submitted to initiation rites performed before one married? There she may have surrendered her virginity to a representative of the god of fertility, Baal, thus dedicating her marriage with Hosea to the god Baal. Was she still a virgin who was inclined or even dedicated to prostitution but had not yet become an active prostitute? Or does the expression mean that the woman would later become unfaithful, even though she was faithful at the beginning of her marriage? We do not know the answer to these questions, yet we must translate the text. Some translations interpret a wife of harlotry as describing the activity of the woman before the marriage; for example, the New English Bible (New English Bible) has “a wanton,” and the New Living Translation (New Living Translation) says “a prostitute.” We do not recommend these renderings. A translation that suggests inclination to prostitution is a better option. The last part of the verse implies that the people of Israel, to whom the prophet’s wife is compared, were once faithful to God but then left him to worship idols. Therefore Good News Translation interprets the phrase as describing what the wife would do after the marriage, saying “your wife will be unfaithful.” Translators will make their own decision, but the interpretation of Good News Translation is preferred.

And have children of harlotry: Some scholars have interpreted the literal phrase children of harlotry to mean that the children were fathered by other men than Hosea. One unlikely theory is that Hosea gradually became suspicious that the second and third children were not his, and so the names show how he gradually rejected them as his own, ending with “Not my people.” Another theory is that, if the woman had dedicated her marriage to Baal, then the children would also belong to Baal and therefore would be dedicated to such prostitution as children of harlotry. In any case, 1.3 clearly states that Hosea was the father of the first child. This is not mentioned explicitly about the second and third child. Good News Translation and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch (1982) understand the phrase to mean that the children will become unfaithful in the way that their mother did, either spiritually unfaithful, or unfaithful when they would get married. Good News Translation renders this clause as “and your children will be just like her.” New Jerusalem Bible simply indicates that the children will be children of a prostitute: “and get children with a whore.” Both interpretations are possible.

For the land commits great harlotry by forsaking the LORD: The conjunction for introduces the grounds for the previous command. Good News Translation renders it well with “In the same way.” The land cannot literally commit harlotry. This figurative expression refers to the people living in the land of Israel who were committing harlotry. Good News Translation therefore translates the land as “my people.” Harlotry is a striking image used by many of the prophets to describe the sin of forsaking the LORD and worshiping other gods. The fact that the Canaanite fertility cult made use of temple prostitutes may mean that the Israelites actually did commit sexual sins when they worshiped in such a place. Commits great harlotry (literally “to prostitute herself she prostitutes herself”) translates a Hebrew emphatic expression that stresses the seriousness and the completeness of what they have done. Good News Translation leaves the figure of prostitution implicit by rendering this clause as “In the same way my people have left me and become unfaithful.” Some other translations repeat the word “prostitute” (New Living Translation), “whoredom” (New Revised Standard Version [New Revised Standard Version]), or “adultery” (New International Version) used in describing the woman, as does the Hebrew, to show that Israel is, in effect, doing the same thing. Since harlotry is a thematic term in the book of Hosea, especially in the first half of the book, it is recommended to translate it in such a way that harlotry can be recognized as a theme.

In this verse Yahweh himself speaks to Hosea, yet he speaks of himself in the third person with the phrase by forsaking the LORD. This manner of Yahweh referring to himself occurs frequently in the prophetic writings. Since he is speaking, many languages will have to refer to him in the first person by saying “have left me” (Good News Translation) or “have left me, Yahweh.”

A translation model for this verse is:

• This is the beginning of what Yahweh spoke through Hosea.
Yahweh said to Hosea, “Marry an adulterous wife and get children of adultery, because the people of the land are adulterous, they abandon Yahweh.”

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:3

So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Diblaim: The conjunction So indicates a causal relationship, which is not explicitly present in Hebrew. The Hebrew connector at the beginning of this verse simply introduces the next event, so it may be rendered “Then” in many languages. The double verbs, went and took, reflect the command in 1.2. In translation use the terminology that was used in 1.2, if possible. In English narrative style it is normal to introduce a person’s name with an identifier, when the name is first mentioned, so Good News Translation renders Gomer as “a woman named Gomer.” Not all languages will need such a device. Other languages have to be more elaborate by translating this clause as “So he married a woman whose name was Gomer, a child of Diblaim.”

And she conceived and bore him a son: Hebrew style calls for the mention of conception, but English style does not. So Good News Translation has “After the birth of their first child, a son.” Translators should employ an appropriate expression or idiom. The words bore him a son indicate that Hosea was the true father of this child. In other languages the natural expression may be “gave him a son.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• So he married Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim. She became pregnant and bore him a son.

• Then Hosea married a woman called Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim. She conceived and gave him a son.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:4

In Hebrew narrative it is common to start the next statement with a conjunction, which is attached to the first word of that statement to show that what follows is next in the order of the narrative. Traditionally that marker (called waw conjunction) has been translated And. However, in many languages it is enough to simply retain the order of the statements. Adding the word “And” is usually unnecessary, so Good News Translation omits it. Other languages have a narrative marker when successive events are narrated.

The LORD said to him: This statement introduces a message that Hosea received as Yahweh’s prophet, just as in 1.2. The pronoun him refers to Hosea, not to his son. To avoid misunderstanding, it may be necessary to replace the pronoun him with “Hosea” as in Good News Translation. The first part of Yahweh’s message here is a command followed by two threats.

Call his name Jezreel: In the Old Testament naming the child was done by the parents, either the mother (see Gen 4.1) or the father (see Gen 16.15). So the fact that Hosea should give the name is not exceptional. However, the statement that Yahweh commands him to do so has significance. The meaning of this name becomes important as a sign from God. Jezreel was best known as a place name. The meaning of the name is “God sows” or “May God sow.” But given the positive connotations of this meaning, it is most likely that the original audience first linked the name with the place name, and more particularly with the events that took place there. The context makes explicit reference to these events. It is better just to give the name in this verse and then provide the allusion to its meaning in 1.11. In many languages the expression Call his name is normally rendered “Name him” (Good News Translation).

For yet a little while introduces the reason for the name Jezreel and indicates that it will not be long before God’s threatened punishment will take place. Wolff estimates that at least four years remained before Jehu’s dynasty would end. New Revised Standard Version renders this phrase as “for in a little while,” and Good News Translation has “because it will not be long before.”

And I will punish the house of Jehu for the blood of Jezreel: The Hebrew verb translated punish has a broad range of meanings, including “visit,” “look at,” “inspect,” “command,” and “call to account” (so De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling). It can be both positive and negative. The context clearly points at a negative sense here, such as “punish” (Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation), “avenge” (King James Version [King James Version]), or “intervene … against” (Bible en français courant). Jehu overthrew King Joram of Israel and became king of Israel in 841 B.C. (see 2 Kgs 9–10). The house of Jehu refers to his family, that is, his descendants still living. Jeroboam II and his son Zechariah were the last two descendants of Jehu to reign in Israel (see 2 Kgs 14.23-29; 15.8-12). The word house is a way of referring to the dynasty, the ruling family. Jehu was the first head of the family who became king of Israel and was regarded as the one who established the dynasty. The phrase the house of Jehu in this case may refer only to the present king himself, since only King Zechariah, the last descendant, was killed, according to 2 Kgs 15.10. As the GNT footnote indicates, the blood of Jezreel refers to the bloody massacre that King Jehu led against the former dynasty, and the massacre took place in the valley of Jezreel. So this phrase may be rendered “the massacre at Jezreel” (New International Version), “the bloodbath … in Jezreel” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), or “the bloodshed in the valley of Jezreel” ( NET Bible Bible [ NET Bible]). However, if blood carries a similar connotation in the receptor language, a literal translation is recommended. If most readers do not know the history of Jehu, it may be better to make the implied information explicit, as Good News Translation has done by rendering this whole clause as “I punish the king of Israel for the murders that his ancestor Jehu committed at Jezreel.” A model that keeps the blood imagery is “I will punish the king of Israel for the blood that his ancestor Jehu shed at Jezreel.” A footnote on the blood of Jezreel similar to the one in Good News Translation is helpful.

And I will put an end to the kingdom of the house of Israel: Good News Translation understands the kingdom of the house of Israel to refer to “Jehu’s dynasty.” However, the house of Israel in Hosea always refers to the people of Israel as a nation, so Good News Translation‘s alternate translation, “the kingdom of Israel,” is also possible. Twenty-one years after Zechariah’s death (743 B.C.) the kingdom of Israel was brought to an end by the Assyrians (722 B.C.). So the last clause of this verse should be thought of as an addition to the information in the previous clause rather than repeating it as a parallel equivalent. It means that the nation of Israel will no longer have its own kingdom; it will no longer have independent rule over itself. The house of Israel regularly refers to the northern kingdom only and does not include Judah to the south.

Translation models for this verse are:

• The LORD said to him, “You should name him Jezreel, because in a short while I will hold the ruling family of Jehu accountable for the bloodshed in Jezreel. I will finish the kingdom of Israel.

• The LORD said to Hosea, “Call him Jezreel, for it will not take long before I will avenge the dynasty of Jehu for the massacre at Jezreel. I will bring an end to the kingship in Israel.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:5

The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces the next statement, as in 1.4 (see comments there).

On that day is a typical prophetic expression for introducing either a threat or a promise from God, which is to be fulfilled at a certain time when God decides to act. The Hebrew word translated day frequently refers to a longer or a more general and indefinite length of time than twenty-four hours, and it frequently refers more directly to the events that are to occur than to the time of their occurrence. What follows occurred around 733 B.C., not at exactly the same time as the events threatened in 1.4, so Good News Translation‘s more general translation is possible: “at that time.” However, translators should consider whether their language has an idiom to introduce prophetic announcements. Here it introduces an eschatological statement, that is, a decisive and final event. Putting it at the beginning of the sentence usually reinforces this idea. This element is not very clear in Good News Translation.

I will break the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel: The bow of Israel is correctly interpreted by Good News Translation as “Israel’s military power.” A single archer’s bow represents Israel’s whole army in this figure of speech. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch renders this clause as “in the valley of Jezreel I will completely destroy Israel’s army.” If the receptor language has a proper metonym for military power or strength (for example, “bow,” “spear,” or “sword”), we recommend that translators use it here.

The valley of Jezreel goes eastward from the city of Jezreel toward the Jordan River. Invaders sometimes entered Israel by this valley (see Jdg 6.33), and it was frequently the scene of large and important battles. The threat of this verse was fulfilled when the Assyrians defeated Israel and took some of Israel’s land (2 Kgs 15.29).

Translation models for this verse are:

• At that time, I will break the sword of Israel in the valley of Jezreel.”

• When that day arrives, I will finish the military power of Israel in the valley of Jezreel.”

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:6

She conceived again and bore a daughter: See 1.3. Good News Translation restructures this sentence to reflect English style: “Gomer had a second child—this time it was a daughter.” However, the element of repetition is obvious in the Hebrew text and reinforces the symbolic meaning of events. Translators should try to maintain this repetition. This verse begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction (literally “And”), which Contemporary English Version renders “Later.” In many languages the pronoun She has to be made explicit at the start of this new episode (so Good News Translation with “Gomer”). 1.3 says “bore him a son,” but here the text says simply bore a daughter. Hosea is not mentioned explicitly as the father, so some commentators believe that another man may have been the father. The normal way to understand this clause is that Hosea was the father, since Hebrew style does not waste words by repeating what would be understood. However, in this context it is quite possible that the second and third children had someone else as father, not Hosea. This is to be expected if the mother acted as a harlot. However, the translation should in no way make this explicit. The ambiguity of the text should be maintained in translation.

And the LORD said to him is literally “and he said to him.” In many cases the pronouns have to be made explicit here by saying “The LORD said to Hosea,” especially if the receptor language does not distinguish between masculine and feminine third person singular pronouns.

Call her name Not pitied, for …: The construction of this sentence is identical to the one in 1.4. In Hebrew an imperative, masculine, singular verb (rendered Call) is followed by the name and the conjunction translated for. We recommend that the translation of the structure is identical, so that the reader can easily recognize the pattern in the text.

It is better to translate the name Not pitied, as most modern versions do, rather than retain the Hebrew form of the name, which is Lo-ruchamah, since the meaning is needed immediately to clarify the name as a sign from Yahweh. However, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible gives both the Hebrew name and its meaning, saying “Lo-Rouhama—that is, Not-Loved.” Some translators may wish to follow this model. Another possible translation is “No mercy” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). Translators will have to decide how to write translated names that include more than one word. Revised Standard Version simply uses a capital letter for the first word in the name. It is also possible to use capitals for all the words of a name, to separate the words by hyphens (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), or to use quotation marks, depending on the style of the receptor language. In any case, the solution to this issue should be applied consistently.

But what does the name Not pitied mean? The Hebrew word for pitied refers to tender, motherly feelings a woman has for her child. In fact, the word as a noun can refer to the womb itself. “Tender mercy” has been used in some translations. Many languages may have a word far better than “pity” to express the motherly love and compassion expressed here—even though such compassion is to be kept from Israel. In any case, the name and the situation to which it applies should match in translation.

The word for emphatically expresses the causal relationship between the meaning of the name and its implications for Israel.

I will no more have pity on the house of Israel: The Hebrew verb for have pity comes from the same root as the noun for pitied. The house of Israel refers to everyone in the northern kingdom of Israel, both king and people alike (see comments on 1.4). So “the nation of Israel” ( NET Bible) is an appropriate translation.

To forgive them at all renders a difficult Hebrew emphatic expression, which is literally “for [or better, surely] to take I will [not] take to [or, for] them.” The verb translated forgive is literally “take” and can also mean “lift” or “carry,” and the word “not” is implied from the previous statement. Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation follow the most common and the most likely interpretation, along with New International Version, New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, the American Translation (An American Translation), the New Jewish Publication Society Version (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), Louis Segond (Segond), Bible de Jérusalem, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, and the Spanish common language version (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). King James Version has “but I will utterly take them away,” which is similar to the Luther translation. This rendering would predict taking the Israelites away into Assyrian captivity, but it does not reflect the Hebrew well since the pronoun for “them” cannot be an indirect object after the preposition for “to/for.” So it seems better to understand “sins” as the implied direct object not to be taken from Israel—that is, they are emphatically not to be forgiven. Bible en français courant has “I will take all my love away from them” (similarly Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Einheitsübersetzung), but the Hebrew does not express “my love,” and such a reference to the action of “showing love” would be unusual. The New American Bible (New American Bible) says “rather, I abhor them utterly,” which is based on an emendation. This emendation follows the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, but it is not reliable.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Later she became pregnant again and bore a daughter. The LORD said to Hosea, “You should name her No-Mercy, because I will have no mercy on the nation of Israel. I will certainly not forgive them.

• She conceived again and gave birth to a daughter. The LORD told Hosea, “Call her No Pity, for I will not show pity to the people of Israel and not forgive them anything at all.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Hosea 1:7

New English Bible omits this verse, although the Hebrew clearly includes it. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project and Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament definitely include it (an {A} decision, meaning there is no significant doubt), so the verse should be included. It should be noted though that the verse interrupts the flow of events by bringing in the situation of Judah. In the parallel conditions in 1.4 and 1.9 this does not happen. This is not a reason to omit the verse. New Jerusalem Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh put it in parenthesis. The significance of these parentheses may escape the reader. It may be better to present the verse as a paragraph of its own.

But renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which is usually translated “and.” Here it marks the contrast between the fates of Israel and Judah, so But is a good connector.

I will have pity on the house of Judah: Yahweh promises that he will treat the southern kingdom, Judah, with love and compassion, in contrast with his treatment of Israel. The translation of have pity should be consistent with the rendering in 1.6. Similarly, the translation of house should be the same as in 1.6. Good News Translation renders the house of Judah as “the people of Judah.”

And I will deliver them by the LORD their God: The expression for deliver should be appropriate for rescue from an enemy army, since the last part of the verse refers to such enemies. The form of the Hebrew verb rendered deliver makes it possible to translate it “make … victorious” or “give … victory” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). As in 1.2, Yahweh is speaking but refers to himself in the third person by saying the LORD their God. Many languages will require a first person reference to God here; for example, Good News Translation says “I, the LORD their God,” and the Dutch common language version (Bijbel in Gewone Taal) has “I am the Lord, their God.”

I will not deliver them by bow, nor by sword, nor by war, nor by horses, nor by horsemen: Yahweh implies that he will rescue Judah by some other means than by war or the weapons of war. The text does not state what the means are, nor should the translator suggest an answer. In some languages it may be necessary to say “I will rescue them by some other means than…” or “I will not rescue them by … I will rescue them some other way.” If deliver them is translated “give them victory,” the preposition by is better expressed as “with” or “through.” Bow, sword, horses, and horsemen are used to carry out warfare. The prophet is using a rhetorical device, listing the instruments of war in order to give the picture of war, but mentioning war itself in the center of these things listed. Good News Translation uses normal English style by rendering this clause as “but I will not do it by war—with swords or bows and arrows or with horses and horsemen.” “War” is mentioned first, then the items of warfare. The bow is known almost universally as a hunting weapon and as a tool of warfare. Good News Translation adds “and arrows” because the two are commonly mentioned together in English style, and because the arrows are implied, since bows are useless without them. The sword was most likely an instrument with a sharp cutting edge as well as a sharp point for piercing. In some cultures the spear is better known as an instrument of war. Good News Translation joins horses with horsemen, saying “horses and horsemen.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch combines the five terms into three: “weapons, horses and riders.” We do not recommend this if the language uses instruments of war as metonyms for war.

Translation models for this verse are:

• But I will have mercy on the nation of Judah, and I, the LORD their God, will save them, not through warfare, not through bows, spears, horses, or horsemen.”

• But I will pity the people of Judah and give them victory. I am the LORD their God. I will not give them victory through bow, sword, war, horses, or horsemen.”

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .