The Book of Hosea may be divided into two parts, according to the two principal periods of the prophet's ministry,--under Jeroboam, when the external condition was as yet prosperous, and the bodily eye did not as yet perceive anything of the storms of divine wrath which were gathering,--and under the following kings, down to Hosea, when the punishment had already begun, and was hastening, by rapid strides, towards its consummation.--Another difference, although a subordinate one, is this:--that the first part, which comprehends the first three chapters, contains prophecies connected with a symbol, while the second part contains direct prophecies which have no such connection. A similar division occurs in Amos also,--with this difference, that there, the symbolical prophecies form the conclusion. The first part may be considered as a kind of outline, which all the subsequent prophecies served to fill up; just [Pg 184] as may the 6th chapter in Isaiah, and the first and second in Ezekiel. We shall give a complete exposition of this section, as it will afford us a vivid view of the whole position of Hosea, and as it is just there that the Messianic announcement meets us in its most developed form. Footnote 1: _Ewald_, _Thenius_, and others, will not grant that such an interregnum took place. As numbers were originally expressed by letters, in which an interchange might easily happen, we cannot deny the possibility of such an error having occurred in 2 Kings xiv. 23. It is quite possible that the duration of Jeroboam's reign was there originally stated at fifty-two or fifty-three, instead of forty-one years. But strong reasons would be required for rendering such a supposition admissible,--the more so, as the interchange would not have been limited to one letter, as _Thenius_ supposes, but must have extended to both. But no such reasons exist. The silence of the Books of Kings upon the subject of this interregnum cannot be urged as a reason, since these books are so exceedingly short as regards the history of the last times of the kingdom of Israel. Sacred historiography has no interest in the details of this process of decay, which began with the death of Jeroboam,--which also is represented by Amos as if it were the day of Israel's death (Amos vii. 11: "Jeroboam shall die by the sword, and Israel shall be led away captive out of their own land"), although bare existence is still, for some time, spared. By the rejection of this interregnum, Hosea's ministry would be shortened by twelve years; but this gain--if such it be--can be purchased only at the expense of a most improbable extension of the duration of Jeroboam's reign. _Simson_, S. 201, has defended the interregnum. THE SECTION CHAP. I.-III.