Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism
Dearman:
6:7 The prophet illustrates Israel’s ongoing faithlessness by reference to an incident at a place named Adam and wickedness in Gilead. Some interpret Adam as a personal name arid thus as a reference to Gen. 3 and the disobedience in the garden.49 According to this view, Israel was repeating the error of the first man’s disobedience to divine command. Another possibility is to take ādām as a collective reference to "people" acting disobediently.50 The Hebrew particle šām ("there") in the verse, however, marks a geographical reference, and Adam is the likely antecedent (see below). In Hos. 10:9 a similar syntactical expression occurs, with an initial reference to Gibeah followed by the particle "there" in the next clause. BHS, followed by a number of commentators, suggests that the kě ("like/as") prefixed to Adam be changed to a bě ("in/at"), so that the phrase would read "but they transgressed the covenant in Adam." Given Hosea’s propensity for similes and comparisons employing a kě, the use of the kě to compare an action at a place is not unexpected.
As noted, at Adam in v. 7 is the likely antecedent for the particle there, although the particle possibly anticipates the reference to Gilead in v. 8. According to Josh. 3: 16 a city on the east bank of the Jordan River is named Adam (modem Tell Damiyeh), not far from Zarethan and the joining of the Jabbok River with the Jordan. The settlement was located along a route between Ephraim and Gilead, which would makes geographical sense, given the reference to the city of Gilead in v. 8. There are, furthermore, indications elsewhere in the broader historical context for political intrigue in Gilead that this obscure reference may reflect, such as the murder in Samaria of Pekahiah, king of Israel, by Pekah, who was accompanied by fifty men from Gilead (2 Kgs. 15:25).51 This event took place ca. 738, during the public activity of Hosea.
The phrase transgress the covenant in v. 7 occurs elsewhere in Hosea (8: 1) and in the or (2 Kgs. 18: 12; Jer. 34: 18), but the nature of the covenant transgressed at Adam is unclear. Should we think of it as the Mosaic covenant, as seems likely in 2 Kgs. 18: 12 (and probably in Hos. 8: 1); as the violation of a self-commitment, such as that indicated in Josh. 24: 16ff.; as a reference to some solemn commitment, like that of Jer. 34:18 (a solemn agreement to free slaves); or even to some agreement made with another state that infringes on YHWH’s sovereignty? In context the critique of Hos. 6:7-11a is that of Israel’s rebelliousness against YHWH; so that whatever particularities are to be associated with place and precipitating event(s) there, it is YHWH’s covenant that has been transgressed.52 Perhaps a parallel might be that of the "covenant of brothers" (Amos 1 :9), where the city-state Tyre is judged for breaking a solemn relationship by engaging in the slave trade or some other form of violence against a group of people. J. Andrew Dearman, The Book of Hosea (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2010), 197-198. [Footnote values and content original.]
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism
Calvin:
Some thus render the word adm, adam,–”As the covenant of man have they transgressed it,” transferring it to the genitive case, “And they have transgressed the covenants as if it was that of man;” that is, as if they had to do with a mortal man, so have they despised and violated my holy covenant; and this exposition is not very unsuitable, except that it somewhat changes the construction; for in this case the Prophet ought to have said, “They have transgressed the covenant as that of a man;” but he says, ‘They as a man,’ etc. But this rendering is far from being that of the words as they are, ‘They as men have transgressed the covenant.’ I therefore interpret the words more simply, as meaning, that they showed themselves to be men in violating the covenant.
And there is here an implied contrast or comparison between God and the Israelites; as though he said, “I have in good faith made a covenant with them, when I instituted a fixed worship; but they have been men towards me; there has been in them nothing but levity and inconstancy.” God then shows that there had not been a mutual concord between him and the Israelites, as men never respond to God; for he sincerely calls them to himself, but they act unfaithfully, or when they have given some proof of obedience, they soon turn back again, or despise and openly reject the offered instruction. We then see in what sense the Prophet says that they had transgressed the covenant of God as men. Others explain the words thus, “They have transgressed as Adam the covenant.” But the word, Adam, we know, is taken indefinitely for men. This exposition is frigid and diluted, “They have transgressed as Adam the covenant;” that is, they have followed or imitated the example of their father Adam, who had immediately at the beginning transgressed God’s commandment. I do not stop to refute this comment; for we see that it is in itself vapid. Calvin, Commmentary, Hosea 6:7.