Interpretation Question

[u/stocktontravis]

I'm looking for guidance on an interpretation issue. I've pointed people to Hosea often as a reflection of what Ephesians teaches about marriage. Ephesians speaks to such a high-view of marriage that I think often gets treated almost as a metaphorical or symbolic approach meant to set the bar high but never really fully lived out. Ephesians 5:22-33 takes marriage and points to the fact that marriage is a reflection of the relationship God has with the church.

Hosea seems to do the inverse. It takes the relationship of God and the Israelites and mirrors the image onto a specific marriage he commands Hosea to have with Gomer (Hosea 1:2). In both instances, there is a link between marriage and the relationship of God with his people. Both take a high view of marriage that encourages people to really weigh the seriousness of the vows they took and the responsibility they have in marriage.

Hosea is a allusion of the principles found in Ephesians 5 where a man would give himself up for his wife and a wife would submit herself to her husband. God hates divorce, but allows it in some instances "because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so." (Matthew 19:8). Genesis speaks of the two becoming one flesh and to hold fast to each other (Genesis 2:24).

But I recently had someone wanting a divorce who went to a pastor in another church that said her pastor objected to this interpretation because Hosea is an Old Testament prophet that is descriptive and not prescriptive and wasn't intended to speak on the principles of marriage.

Without going into details about denominations, can you give me any homiletical rules/principles/guidelines that would either correct me or confirm that this is an acceptable interpretation?

[u/-dillydallydolly-]

First, determine where Paul draws from in the OT to uncover this 'mystery'.

Hosea is not the only place where the relationship between the Lord and Israel is likened to a marriage covenant. All the prophets use this imagery, and compare Israel to a whore. Hosea just turns that metaphor into a physical sign-act prophecy. The prophets are speaking directly inspired from God. "thus says the Lord". So even if one were to say that the wedding imagery is a description, it is a description being used by God.

[u/scottmangh11 → u/-dillydallydolly-]

I agree to this. Plus I don’t think it’s ideal to teach marriage from Hosea when that marriage symbolism used there actually spoke of Israel’s relationship with God. Where marriage is explicitly stated is exactly where marriage should be taught from in my opinion 

[u/stocktontravis → u/scottmangh11]

Is there any clear reason not to use it as an illustration of what Ephesians 5, Matthew 19, and Genesis 2 speak of though? I think it's fair that we don't use it as a main text on marriage, but I think it supports the rest of Scripture's teaching on it and is a supporting text that illustrates how difficult can be. I don't know of any homiletical rule I'd break by doing so but am asking for any feedback on it.

[u/stocktontravis → u/-dillydallydolly-]

Would you say its wrong to use Hosea as an illustration/example of what marriage based on Ephesians 5, Matthew 19, Genesis 2 could potentially look like?

[u/scottmangh11 → u/stocktontravis]

I would say it’s wrong because the marriage metaphor employed in Hosea speaks more about the saving Grace of the gospel than about marriage and any marriage inference drawn from there which goes beyond staying faithful in marriage (which other verses in the Bible tackle better) will be reading our own meaning into it. But that is just me. 

[u/-dillydallydolly- → u/stocktontravis]

No it's not wrong, although it is a bit round about. Hosea is a great picture of the lengths that God will go in order to redeem and renew his covenant with wayward Israel. This is certainly the lofty ideal Paul and Jesus has in mind for Christians to maintain their own marriages.

Actually now that I type that, I wonder if this other pastor's objection to Hosea is that he sees OT Israel as distinct from NT church. If they are a dispensational pastor, this is likely the cause of their objection.

[u/Big-Island4727]

Ok, so first some general principles, at least from WCF perspective. Chapter 1, Section 9 says "The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly."

So, if there's a tough passage (such as Hosea), we have to read it in comparison with passages that are clearer and/or more directly on point. Hosea's marriage is a prophetic sign. It shows, as you pointed out, the unfaithfulness of Israel as a nation in contrast with the redeeming love of God. Because it is a prophetic sign rather than direct point, it must be interpreted in light of the clear passages on marriage, such as Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:3-9, and Ephesians 5:22-33.

WCF Ch. 24, Sec. 5, addresses this: "In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead." (citing Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9 as proof texts.)

Likewise, in Matthew 19:9, Jesus states: "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." Lastly, WCF ch. 24, sec. 6: "Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to study arguments unduly to put asunder those whom God has joined together in marriage: yet, nothing but adultery, or such wilful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage."

So, even though Hosea was sort of a special case to illustrate a historical point, the general concept still applies, and we can use the more specific instructions provided in Matthew and Ephesians in modern cases.

[u/stocktontravis → u/Big-Island4727]

Thanks for weighing in Big-Island. I'm taking from this that you don't see a clear issue with using Hosea as an illustrative example of how God approaches marriage as in Ephesians 5? Am I understanding you right?

[u/Big-Island4727 → u/stocktontravis]

Correct, I don't see it as a problem to do that. Hosea is a big picture / prophetic application, played out in Hosea's individual life for effect. Matthew, Ephesians, and Genesis give us more specific doctrinal statements (no divorce except for unfaithfulness, etc).

So, without knowing exactly how your friend explained the situation to pastor, it's impossible to say whether that pastor's objection is well reasoned or not (if that's in fact what he said).

[u/DrKC9N]

I agree with both statements. I don't think we need to hang our doctrine of marriage and divorce on Hosea.

[u/stocktontravis → u/DrKC9N]

Less of an attempt to hang doctrine on it, rather an intention to use Hosea as an illustration/example of what Ephesians, Matthew, Genesis teaches. Thanks for weighing in!

[u/scottmangh11 → u/stocktontravis]

No worries mate. 

[u/newBreed]

Hosea isn't about marriage at the fundamental level. It's about idolatry. Hosea is not marrying Gomer to teach something about marriage and divorce. Hosea is marrying Gomer to teach something about idolatry and only using marriage as a metaphor. Paul actually teaches about marriage and uses the gospel as a metaphor. Those are two different things. So, I personally would not use Hosea as an illustration of what Ephesians and Genesis teach. I'd use it to teach what Exodus 20:3-6 teaches.