They eat the sin of my people, and their soul longeth for their iniquity.
Hosea's charge in this chapter falls on a whole nation at once — the people, and the priests who were meant to stand between them and God. Here the men who handled Israel's sin offerings live off the very sins they were meant to take away. What happens when religious leaders profit from the wrongdoing of the people they serve?
As the passage goes on, the accused change. One writer follows the charge as it moves from the nation to the men at the altar. Quoting an older translation, he notes that the word for "sin" here may mean the sin offering itself:
"They eat up the sin [perhaps sin-offering] of My people, and long after [lift up their soul to] their iniquity. Therefore it shall be, like people, like priest; I will visit upon him his ways, and make his doings to return to him." Without our noticing, we move here from the people to the priest. The two are treated as one, in their wickedness and in their punishment: in the last part of verse 9 it is not "them" but "him." They were equally evil. No class escaped the corruption; people and priests were corrupt alike. Their position might make the priests more guilty than the people, but morally they were all one.
The second half of the verse is about desire: the priests set their hearts on the people's guilt. Every sin brought a sacrifice, and every sacrifice fed the priest. One commentator sets this inside Israel's larger loss of its calling as a nation of priests:
Israel is rejected from being a nation of priests to Jehovah — a glory which had been promised them (Ex. 19). This brings in the judgment on the priests themselves. They were glad when the people sinned, because the people's sacrifices made them rich. The proverb, "Like people, like priest," was seen in them... God would give them up to the fruits of their iniquity.
The provision itself was not the problem. The law let the priest who offered a sin offering eat it. That meal was meant to cost him something:
The ordinary sin offerings were "killed before the LORD." The priest who offered one was to "eat it: in the holy place … in the court of the tabernacle" (Lev. 6:25-26). Here is food on the table the Lord has spread for those who can eat it: for those who can take up the sins of others before the Lord, feeling and confessing them as if they were their own. Feeding on what God has provided here calls for self-judgment, spiritual power and God-given understanding. Few show that much before God.
Nearness to holy things is no safeguard. One writer sees the same failure in Eli's sons, priests who fed themselves from what the people brought to God:
Being close to God on the outside, without knowing Him, has always opened the way to the worst departures from Him. Someone at a distance from the sanctuary would naturally feel more of God about it. That sense fades away, more and more, in those who handle sacred things every day... A holiness that is only external is the worst unholiness... Eli's sons shamelessly and openly made themselves fat with the offerings of the Lord's people, with a violence that defied Him to His face.
The same arrangement appears again later. When pardons were sold for money, the sellers gained by leaving people in the dark:
The sale of indulgences was bound to encourage sin. In fact, the less informed among the people could see nothing in the teaching but plain permission to do evil. And the priests, who profited all the more from this twisted view of their own teaching, were in no hurry to put the people right.
The failure here also shows what a priest must have. One writer draws that lesson from Hosea 4:
An essential thing for the priest is, as we have learned from Hosea 4, that he should have the knowledge of God. What we learn of God is to form a path, as it were, along which our souls travel as they come to Him.
- Knowledge lost. Hosea 4 makes the knowledge of God essential for a priest. Nearness to holy things without it opens the way to every failure in this verse.
- Appetite gained. The meal was meant to cost the priest something: carrying other people's sins before God as if they were his own. Instead he made a living from their wrongdoing.
- Profit protected. People who gain from the sins of others are in no hurry to put them right. That was true of these priests, and of the sellers of pardons long after.
- No class exempt. "Like people, like priest." Their position may make the priests more guilty. But people and priests were one, and the judgment falls on both.
- Judgment matched. God pays each man back for his own ways. He gives them up to the fruit of the very sin they longed for.
And it shall be as the people so the priest; and I will visit their ways upon them, and recompense to them their doings;
Hosea has been listing the sins of a whole nation. Here the verdict falls on priest and people together. The proverb sounds almost casual. But it asks a hard question: when a nation's religious leaders are as corrupt as the people they serve, who is to blame?
Where the ESV reads "them" in the closing lines, some older translations read "him." One commentator builds his whole point on that singular.
Here we move almost without noticing from the people to the priest. In the closing clauses of verse 9 the two stand as one — in wickedness, and also in punishment: not "them" but "him." They were equally evil. No class was free from the pollution: people and priests were corrupt alike. Given their position the priests might be more guilty than the people; but morally they were all one. And God would not fail to judge.
The priests were not just putting up with the nation's sin. They had found a way to live off it.
God rejects Israel from being a nation of priests to Jehovah — a glory He had promised them (Ex. 19). This leads into the judgment of the priests themselves. They took pleasure in the sins of the people, so that they could enrich themselves from their sacrifices. The proverb "Like people, like priest" showed itself in them.
The same thing happened at the golden calf — the idol Aaron made for Israel. Priest and people each pointed at the other.
God entrusts certain shared blessings to man's responsibility, and man's failure soon forfeits them. God still bears with man in long patience, dealing with people one by one according to His own grace. But in the end the time comes to judge the failing body as a whole. "Then the LORD sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf, the one that Aaron made." Aaron laid the blame on the people; but God views it as "with the priest, so with the people." God knows exactly how much guilt belongs to each party. Wherever they may lay it on one another, God charges both alike.
The influence runs in both directions. A corrupt priesthood needs a willing audience.
The people, if they are only outwardly connected with God, are glad to have a worldly priesthood. So in the history of the professing church we see terrible wickedness in the priests. But we must remember that it was only a reflection of the state of a worldly people — people of God in name only. No doubt a godly priest would do much to check the spreading evil among the people. A godless one would speed up their decline. This is why those in such a place carry a solemn responsibility. But the important point is this: a people far from God make a wicked priesthood possible. And that wicked priesthood drives them further from God.
Kelly said the priests' position could make them more guilty. Another writer explains why.
Position and privilege increase responsibility. If a priest or a ruler sinned, he had to bring a larger sacrifice than one of the common people (Leviticus 4)... A private Christian who falls into error or immorality has an influence only on his own circle. But if a well-known teacher in the Church leaves the way of truth, he often draws thousands after him into his own evil path.
The punishment named in this verse is not random. It is a person's own conduct handed back to him. One commentator finds mercy in that.
So it must always be: what we sow, we reap, whether as a nation or as individuals, for "God is not mocked!" It is a solemn thought, yet a good one. What would the world soon become if God no longer governed it morally, or stopped disciplining His people?
- Alike — People and priest had become morally one, so no class escaped: "no class was free from the pollution."
- Appetite — The priests profited from the sins they should have judged. They took "pleasure in the sins of the people."
- Alibi — Passing the blame changes nothing: "God charges both alike."
- Audience — The rot travels both ways. A people far from God "make a wicked priesthood possible," and that priesthood drives them further away.
- Account — Judgment here hands a life back to its owner. That steady moral government is a mercy, not only a threat.