Reading Hosea–Micah: A Literary and Theological Commentary

Written by Terence E. Fretheim Reviewed By Michael B. Shepherd

Terence Fretheim is Elva B. Lovell Professor of Old Testament Emeritus at Luther Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota. His previous publications on the so-called Minor Prophets include The Message of Jonah: A Theological Commentary. The Reading the Old Testament series is intended to present “‘cutting-edge research in [a form] accessible’ to a wide audience ranging from specialists in the field to educated laypeople” (p. 1). Fretheim’s commentary is thus not a technical analysis of the Hebrew text but an exposition of the “thought units” of the text’s final form.

Fretheim states in his introduction that he is aware of the ancient tradition that counts Hosea–Malachi as a single book (the Book of the Twelve). He is also aware of attempts in modern scholarship to explain the internal evidence for the composition of the Twelve. Nevertheless, Fretheim focuses on the individuality of the first six books of the Twelve. He does not give a defense of this approach, nor does he argue against (or interact with) more recent research into the making of the Book of the Twelve.

Commentary for each of the six books (Hosea–Micah) features concise introductory material designed to address special issues related to the particular book at hand. The commentary itself is not word-by-word or even verse-by-verse but section-by-section exegesis, giving attention to smaller details as needed. The author does not provide an annotated translation of the texts. In fact, it is often not clear what translation or what text (e.g., Masoretic Text, Septuagint, etc.) the author is following and why. Naturally the longer books, Hosea and Amos, receive the lion’s share of discussion.

Fretheim deals briefly in his introduction to Joel with what is one of the most prominent themes in the Book of the Twelve, namely, the Day of the Lord—which, out of the books he treats, surfaces in Joel, Amos, and Obadiah. According to Fretheim, “The phrase refers not to a single day but to several different days (past, imminent, or future) on which God is active in a decisive way for or against Israel and/or foreign nations” (p. 90). Fretheim does not entertain other views on this subject. This has the advantage of concision, but the disadvantage is the loss of a broader frame of reference for the reader.

Fretheim’s treatment of Jonah takes the standard critical approach that denies the book its historicity. He finds many details unbelievable such as the size of the city of Nineveh and the story of the fish. He does not interact with conservative explanations of these details, nor does he explore the option that the author intended the book to be read as an historical narrative whether or not the reader thinks it actually happened. Fretheim extends his view of the book’s exaggeration to include its presentation of God: “Indeed, might the book of Jonah be saying that, in and through the exaggerations, in spite of what readers may think (or hope for!), their God is not such a manipulative, all-controlling deity?” (p. 172). Of course, this presupposes that the reader shares Fretheim’s understanding of God as manipulative in the book.

Students and pastors (and perhaps a more general readership) will find Fretheim’s commentary to be a sure-footed, well-written, and accessible guide at many points. But the claim that this volume constitutes “cutting-edge research” for specialists is highly questionable. Much of what is of value in this book appears in other commentaries on these books. Discussion of the early versions and the history of interpretation from antiquity to the present is notably absent. Fretheim’s “Works Cited” section features only twenty authors apart from his own name. Thus, while the commentary is generally helpful and edifying, the author apparently does not intend to make an original contribution to scholarship.


Michael B. Shepherd

Michael Shepherd is professor of biblical studies at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio.

Other Articles in this Issue

Too often people think of the Reformation in terms of an abstract theological debate...

Abstract: Evangelical Faith and the Challenge of Historical Criticism, edited by Christopher Hays and Christopher Ansberry, argues that evangelical scholars have failed to embrace historical criticism to the extent that they could and should...

Thomas Prince, editor of The Christian History—the first religious periodical in American history—could hardly have invented the Great Awakening, as Frank Lambert argues...

Theology is first and foremost about who God is and then about what he has done...

I would like to consider several elements in reviewing Bray’s work...