Font Size
Hosea reminds his people that the key to success of Jacob their forefather was not his ability to wrestle with men but with God (12:3-6). Like Jacob, they must give up their foolish reliance on intrigue, wealth, violence, and alliances (11:12-12:1, 7-8) and choose a life of obedient dependence. If not, they will find themselves, like Jacob, in exile in a far country, condemned to work at hard labor (12:12).
Interspersed with the Jacob imagery are references to the covenant relationship established in the Exodus (12:9; 13:4). “[He is] the Lord your God” is covenant language (see Ex 20:2). Because of what God did for them and because they formally accepted the relationship, they are doubly obligated to him. Through Moses (12:13), and by means of other prophets since that time (v.10), God has attempted to get them to live in obedience to his character and recognize the destructive character of wickedness and idolatry (v.11), but all to no avail.
Therefore, just as the Exodus generation was doomed to wander in the desert because it refused Moses' prophetic word (12:14; 13:6), so this generation will return to the wilderness, figuratively speaking (12:9; see above on 2:14-23). They have refused the truth of God and have chosen instead gods that are not God (13:1-2) and kings who are not the King (vv.9-11). As a result, there is nothing permanent about them (v.3); all of their efforts will be stillborn (v.13). The fecundity and fertility for which they have labored so strenuously will be devoured and destroyed (vv.15-16).
Commentators differ over the correct understanding of 13:14. Is it a word of hope or a word of destruction? Everything hangs on the way the first sentence is construed. If it is to be taken as a question (as per RSV), then the sense is surely negative, as the negative context on either side would indicate. But while a question is possible, there is nothing in the Hebrew to require that reading. If the sentence is to be taken as an affirmation (as per NIV), then the sense of the verse is surely positive. This reading is somewhat favored by Paul’s positive use of the address to death and hell in 1Co 15:55. However, since Paul is using the verse only in an allusive way, his usage by no means dictates the reading here. On balance, while the word of hope is certainly possible, the negative context on both sides of the verse seems to favor the word of destruction.