Queer Theory and the Prophetic Marriage Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible by Stuart Macwilliam

Author:Stuart Macwilliam [Macwilliam, Stuart]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: History, Ancient, General
ISBN: 9781134945658
Google: HrvsCwAAQBAJ
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2016-04-08T01:27:18+00:00

6.6.2 The Content of Third Movement

If, then, it is reasonable to argue that the third movement of Hosea’s version of the marriage metaphor begins at verse 16 (14), and is thereby all the more powerful, the next task is to consider its content. I shall not attempt a comprehensive (re-)interpretation, but shall highlight some notable features that are relevant to the overall argument.

One obvious feature is what Andersen and Freedman call “the abrupt shifts … signalled by changes in the pronouns” (1980: 264), something familiar from the discussion of Jeremiah in the last chapter. Andersen and Freedman comment that “it is easy to see why some scholars can divide the whole passage into several small oracles, each with its own integrity” (1980: 264). Scholars with a bent for redaction criticism have long attempted to unpeel the editorial layers, and in the process turn it into a second-class text. Wolff, for instance, sees the passage as an accretion:

Since this literary composition is far less logically connected than vv 4–17, we should probably not ascribe it to Hosea, but to the redactor responsible for 1:2–6, 8f. This is suggested by the expression “on that day” … This formula is evidence of his concern to elucidate the final event in 2:4–17 with the help of Hosea’s later sayings. (Wolff 1974: 48)

His view of the redaction as northern in origin is challenged by, amongst others, Grace I. Emmerson, who argues that while the individual verses are Hosean, a different theological message has been achieved by a subsequent Judaean rearrangement (1984: 36–48). I must return to the hermeneutical implications shortly. For now, it is enough to observe that, despite their disagreement about the history of the redactional processes, both Emmerson and Wolff leave the impression of a text that is a belated tailpiece to the previous section; as Emmerson expresses it: “The fragmentary sayings of 2:18–25 serve, in their present position, to fill out the expectation of future restoration presented in 2:16–17” (1984: 37). If, however, objections to the authenticity of the text are left aside, one remarkable feature that can be observed is that of the unconditionality of the promises it describes. Andersen and Freedman put the case:

By contrast [viz. To 2:4–15], the promises in 2:16–25 are not attached to conditions of reform … no indication that the amazing transformation between 15 and 16 is brought about by a dramatic alteration in the woman’s (Israel’s) character. (Andersen and Freedman 1980: 263)

This seems to be the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the passage, but for many scholars it represents an unacceptable offence against justice. Andersen and Freedman themselves share this unease, for they argue that if no conditions were imposed upon the woman, nevertheless the punishments threatened in 2:4–15 (2–13) “correspond to” those carried out in chapters 4 to 14, and that therefore “restoration comes after justice has been satisfied” (1980: 263). They also question the lack of repentance: “While none of the redemptive acts which follow in 2:16–25 necessarily presuppose repentance on the part of the woman, they may be linked to it through verses 8–9” (1980: 263).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.