The prescriptions of the Mosaic law found in Deuteronomy certainly cover a range of topics; after all, the Mosaic law functioned not only as ‘ecclesiastical law’, but as ‘civil law’ as well. However, despite the fact that there are a wide range of teachings, that doesn’t imply that, within the context of a particular teaching, there’s a plurality of meanings. A prohibition against prostitution is a prohibition against prostitution, not a teaching against plundering cities. :shrug:
It’s looking even better for “harlot and dog” being the worship of idol gods. (Baal and Asherah, maybe?)
I would suggest that you’re trying a little too hard to make your assertion work. First off, in order to explain a teaching that’s being presented as from the time of Moses, you’re appealing to actions of the Israelites that do not take place until some 500 years later. That’s kind of like trying to justify a law written in 16th century England by pointing to a 21st century controversy! That’s just anachronistic…
More importantly, though, you’re conflating a literal problem with a later allegorical allusion to a different problem. In the passages you cite, especially Hosea, we see God pointing to literal ‘harlotry’ and making the case that idolatry, in a spiritual sense, is not unlike literal prostitution. That’s kind of like someone today, bristling under their workload, exclaiming, “what am I, your slave?” It’s not that he’s really a slave, but that he’s making a reference to a real situation from the past, for the sake of communicating an idea. Same thing here: the “worship of idol gods,” in the context of Hosea, isn’t the same as the “harlot and dogs” reference of Deuteronomy, although Hosea uses this image to explain the evils of idol worship and of the fall from proper worship of God.
It’s a valiant attempt, but it still doesn’t work. :shrug:
(Hosea 9:1) p. 46 – “The idolatry of Israel is here, as heretofore, spoken of as adultery. … [Israel] paid her offerings to Baal—here thought of as the harlot-hire of her spiritual adultery.”
See what I mean? Your source isn’t claiming that ‘idolatry’ is ‘adultery’, but that it’s “spoken of as adultery” and that it isn’t literal, but only “spiritual adultery”. Big difference, there. (Valid allusion, I’d say, and it’s the brilliance of Hosea’s prophetic witness – but that allusion doesn’t explain the literal use of the concept in Deuteronomy.)