Central Idea

The people have been swept up by a spirit of whoredom and are all together guilty.

Translation notes.

15c-d: "Enter not into Gilgal, nor go up to Beth-aven"? (ESV)

Gilgal and Beth-aven can be taken as indirect objects (as the ESV and most translations do) or as vocatives (as I have done). The latter is possible because there is no explicit preposition like אל or ל ("to"). (It matters not that the number and gender of the verbs do not match the city names, because they do not match the ESV's presumed vocative subject either: Israel. The number and gender of the verbs are rather indicating that the people of these cities are being addressed. See Him, them, her? below.) 

I have chosen to translate it this way to better coincide with 15b. Gilgal and Beth-aven being northern cities, it makes more sense in this context that they are being commanded not to go to Judah.

15d: Beth-aven = Bethel?

Commentaries commonly understand the use of "Beth-aven" (meaning "house of wickedness") in Hosea to be a polemic reference to Bethel (meaning "house of God"). However, there does exist a place called Beth-aven nearby Bethel (according to Josh 7:2) which is literally referred to (i.e. not meaning Bethel) in every occurrence of this name outside of Hosea. 

Therefore, while it is surely possible that Beth-aven does refer to Bethel in Hosea, what is the evidence to assume this?

16:c-d: Is this a verse of curse or blessing?

The NET Bible gives a good summary of the difficulty and an attempt at a translation.

The syntax of this line is difficult and has been understood in two ways: (1) a declarative statement as an announcement of judgment (BDB 774 s.v. ‏עַתָּה‎ 1.b): “Now the LORD will feed them like a lamb in the broad field” (cf. KJV, ASV, NCV, NLT) or (2) as a rhetorical question lamenting the uncooperative spirit of Israel: “How can the LORD feed them like a lamb in a meadow?”; cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV), designed to produce a negative answer (“He cannot feed them…!”). However, this statement lacks an explicit interrogative marker. Although Hosea occasionally asks a rhetorical question without an explicit interrogative marker (e.g., 10:9; 13:14a), he normally does use a rhetorical particle to introduce rhetorical questions (e.g., 6:4; 8:5; 9:5, 14; 11:8; 13:9–10, 14b). Elsewhere, Hosea uses the introductory temporal adverb ‏עַתָּה‎ (“soon”) to introduce announcements of imminent future judgment (2:12; 4:16; 5:7; 8:8, 13; 10:2) and accusations of sin (5:3; 13:2). Although Israel has been as rebellious as a stubborn heifer, the LORD will indeed gain control of Israel: they will be like lambs (weakened and defeated) when he puts them out to pasture in a broad field (exile).

Yet one issue still remains with this understanding. Everywhere else in scripture the Hebrew behind "broad field" is used in a positive way (beckoning the translation here of "wide pasture" if it were not for the context). Still, the translation decision of the NET Bible seems to be the most plausible.

What is the flow?

This is what the arc is supposed to show of course. The main difficultly with this passage, however, is vs15. As much as I can understand, this is a pure parentheses and so hard to connect. Without it, I would connect verses 12-14 and 16-18 with a Series as both contain varied indictments of the people. As it stands, I have simply left a logical relationship or two missing. A descriptive flow of summary statements may help us in this passage:

12: My people treat their staff like God and seek guidance from it.

13a-d: They also perform sacrifices in pagan ways.

13e-14f: As a result, their daughters act as prostitutes.

14g: And as a further and ultimate result, they will come to ruin.

15: (Do not spread your guilt to Judah!)

16-18: Israel is stubborn, joined to idols, whoring, and loving shame.

19: To sum-up, they are carried away by a spirit of whoredom and will come to shame.

What does "spirit of whoredom" mean?

Whether this speaks of a spiritual being (i.e. a demon) influencing them OR of the peoples' own corrupt spirits leading their actions astray OR of a general sinful disposition that has swept over of the population OR something else is difficult to say. But there are at least two things that we can clearly observe.

1. This spirit is leading them or causing them to leave God and sin.
2. This reality is not something that removes the people's guilt (i.e. it does not make them mere victims), but rather acts as a point of indictment.

Why is the adultery of the men a basis for not punishing the whoring women?

We find this reality in 13e-14f and with it, a question that we must ask. Will our just God simply overlook and not punishment one group of people for their sin on the basis of another group also being sinful? This does not seem like justice.

And surely it would not be, if this was referring to ultimate acquittal toward individuals, and this was the point of the passage. But this is not the point of the passage. Rather, a rhetorical effect is being sought to emphasize the great fault of the wicked men who create the demand for prostitution and lead the women into great sin. In other words, God in effect begins by pointing at the women and calling their sin by ugly names, but then continues by dramatically turning his finger toward the men and crying out, "But it is your fault! And thus I am coming after you, not them!" Thus, God is declaring that he will not make these whoring women the focus of his corporate judgment at this time, but this does not impeach the reality that every sin shall be accounted for on the last day.

As a point of application, let me address the men. Do you view porn on the internet? Do you seek out movies with sex scenes? Repent! Immediately and completely, lest the Lord come after you for your sin and theirs!

Him, them, her??

Often times translations will bring greater unity in the number and gender of pronouns in a prophetic passage than really exists in the Hebrew. Such is the case for the passage at hand. To demonstrate how the Hebrew actually does make use of pronouns here, I have reverted all the pronouns to their literal translation.

With that said, do not be confused. While such switches in pronouns in English prose would certainly indicate new referents, this is common in Hebrew and does not necessitate different referents. However, it may indicate different emphases. Thus, for example, the occurrences of "his" and "him" in 12a-b refer to "my people" and so does the "they" in 12d. Nonetheless, there may be an indication of emphasis of the people as a corporate unit and then of the people as a group of individuals with the presence of singular and plural pronouns respectively.

Who is your shield?

Throughout the Psalms we read of God being the writer's shield--meaning his protection and where he puts his trust. Here, we find the rulers of the people referred to as their shields (assuming we have interpreted this usage of "shields" correctly) and with it a double-indictment. First, the rulers love shame. They take great delight and care in their sinful rejection of God and embrace of paganism. This is not a hidden wickedness, but an open embrace permeated by a spirit of boasting. Second, the people are implicitly indicted in these words as well. For they have rejected God as their shield and instead embraced their shame-loving leaders for this role in their hearts.

So who is your shield? Where does your heart put its trust? Do you rest assured because of a sovereign God ordering history or because you live in a strong country? Whether it be America or Israel or any other country, our leaders do dearly love shame as they deny the true God and his gospel. (And even if they did not, our heart still must not make them our shield, but God alone.) 

Paganism is designed to be pleasurable.

The shade of the terebinth tree really is good. This is worth thinking about because we do not ourselves want to be ensnared unwittingly into paganism. Giant BBQs at the tops of mountains (13a-b) under shade-giving trees (13c-d) and sex with beautiful women (14e-f;18:b) after indulging in drinks sweet to the tongue and relaxing to the body (18a)--these things all truly are pleasures. But they are also rip-offs. The pagan gods--who are no gods at all--did not create them, but rather the one Creator made them to be enjoyed by his people in accord with the truth and with hearts full of thanksgiving (1Tim 4:1-5).

But we must remember: you have to give it up before you can get it back. Good things that God has created are not just tied to paganism in false religion, but often times in our hearts as well. Thus, lest we be idolators, we must first count all these things as loss compared to knowing Messiah Jesus and abstain. We will, be it in this life or in the kingdom to come, receive them all back as means of enjoying our great King!