Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] The meaning of "the blood of Jezreel" in Hosea 1:4

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Leonard Jayawardena <leonardj AT live.com>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] The meaning of "the blood of Jezreel" in Hosea 1:4
  • Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 14:09:35 +0600


This is my first post to the Hebrew list and so greetings to everyone on the
list.

I have been studying the question of the meaning of "the blood of Jezreel" in
Hosea 1:4 for a long time and is of the view that the usual meaning attached
to this phrase, i.e., the blood shed at Jezreel, massacre at Jezreel, etc.
(based on Jehu's massacres as reported in 2 Kings 9-10) is wrong for a number
of reasons. Many translations reflect this interpretation, e.g., "the
bloodshed of Jezreel" (NASB). As serious students of the Bible are aware,
this interpretation of the above phrase results in a contradiction between
Hosea 1:4 and 2 Kings 10:30, the latter of which commends Jehu for obeying
God's command to destroy the house of Ahab.

I am of the opinion that "Jezreel" in "the blood of Jezreel" is best
understood as a possessive genitive for a number of reasons. Gomer's first
son is named Jezreel to signify that God will break Israel's military power
in a decisive battle in the Valley of Jezreel (v. 5). Since Gomer's first son
"Jezreel" represents Israel, the phrase "the blood of Jezreel" means "the
death of Jezreel," i.e., the death of Israel, which is avenged on the house
of Jehu because of the central role they played in the idolatry of the
nation, which (i.e., the idolatry) was the cause of divine judgement against
the nation as the book clearly shows (cf. Hosea 13:1: "...but [Ephraim]
incurred guilt through Baal and *died*" [emphasis mine]). (I understand
"Baal" here and elsewhere in the book of Hosea to refer to the bull worship
introduced to the northern kingdom by Jeroboam I, which was what brought
divine judgement upon the nation.) That is, the death sentence was passed on
Israel when Israel apostasized under that king (cf. Genesis 2:17), which was
carried out eventually by the Assyrians in 721 B.C.

In this post I present a possible linguistic argument for taking "Jezreel" as
a possessive gentive and would like to know what others think.

In the phrase “the blood of Jezreel,” “blood” and “Jezreel” are both concrete
nouns. The genitive construction “the blood of …” occurs 70 times in the OT,
in 64 times out of which (including Hosea 1:40) the absolute contains a
concrete noun/s. Out of these 64 times in which "blood" is in a construct
state with a concrete noun/s in the OT, only in “the blood of the wound”
(which would mean “the blood flowing from the wound") in 1 Kings 22:35
(disregarding Hosea 1:4) do we see the genitive not being possessive or
partitive as the “the blood of the wound” belongs to the wounded person and
not to the wound. The genitive in this case could be considered a genitive of
source as the wound is the source of the blood. More significantly, (a) when
the referent of the genitive is a person (e.g., “the blood of Naboth” [1 Kg.
21:19]), the blood always belongs/belonged to the referent, i.e., the
reference is always to the own blood of the referent (28 times in the OT by
my count); and (b) when the genitive is a proper noun like “Jezreel,” the
referent is always a person and the expression always refers to the own blood
of the referent of the genitive: “the blood of Asahel” (2 Sam. 3:27), “the
blood of Abner” (2 Sam. 3:28), “the blood of Naboth” (1 Kg. 21:19; 2 Kg.
9:26) and “the blood of Jerusalem” (Is. 4:4). These five cases could be
considered a subset of (a) above. (Some may disagree that, in "the blood of
Jerusalem," "Jerusalem" is a possessive genitive.)

Therefore, we would expect, based on the foregoing facts, that Jezreel in
“the blood of Jezreel” is a person and that the reference is to the own blood
of Jezreel.

I would greatly appreciate others' comments on the above. I also would like
to know whether there are precedents in extra-biblical Hebrew literature
where the phrase "the blood of X" means "the blood shed at X" or "bloodshed
at X" where X is a proper noun (like Jezreel).


Leonard Jayawardena
Sri Lanka
_________________________________________________________________
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger 
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page