Annotations for Amos
Annotations for Amos
Amos. Most OT characters are introduced with their patronymic (“son of . . .”) or are at least qualified by a place-name (“Micah of Moresheth,” ). Amos is distinctive in having no further identification, but he is not unique in that sense. He is definitely not Isaiah’s father ()—their names differ even more in Hebrew than they do in English. His name was not uncommon in the ancient Levant; it appears on two seals from the same general area and period, and it also appears in Phoenician and Punic sources. It has a passive form and means simply “protected.” one of the shepherds. Amos was a farmer by trade, not a professional or permanent prophet, as he later protests fiercely (). However, the Hebrew word translated “shepherds” is not the usual one for someone who keeps sheep. It only occurs elsewhere in the OT in of King Mesha of Moab, who paid Israel an enormous tribute, and indicates someone who is a “sheep-breeder.” In “shepherd” translates a different Hebrew term that normally refers to cattle herding. So Amos probably kept a range of animals, though both Hebrew terms may be fairly general. Amos also describes himself as a dresser of “sycamore-fig trees” (). This involves scraping or piercing the figs to hasten their growth and repel insects. However, sycamores grew in the western foothills and the Jordan Valley, not in Tekoa, so Amos was either a migrant worker to the former or, more probably, owned sycamore-fig groves in the latter. Either way, he was an ordinary farmer used to hard manual labor. the earthquake. Israel’s territory lay along the geologic fault line running from Asia Minor to Africa’s Great Rift Valley, so Israel was very prone to earthquakes. This one is not mentioned elsewhere (except perhaps ), but it must have been extremely strong, since it was cited centuries later to illustrate the upheaval of God’s future appearing (). This earthquake is now established in the archaeological record with evidence from excavations at Hazor, Gezer, Beersheba, and possibly Lachish, Deir ‘Alla, Ashdod and Bethel. Earthquakes became a common prophetic motif of future calamity, and one is implied in , which uses the same Hebrew root for “shake.” More important for Amos, this earthquake must have validated his ministry as a true prophet of Yahweh. Uzziah . . . Jeroboam. The kings named in Amos’s date formula provide a range of time for his prophetic mission. Uzziah of Judah and Jeroboam II of Israel ruled for most of the first half of the eighth century BC. The earthquake cited here and attested by excavations at Hazor (Stratum VI) dates to approximately 760 BC. Since Amos claims not to be a professional prophet, many interpreters believe that the prophecies of this book would have covered a very short span of time rather than stretching over several decades.
The LORD roars. Normally it is lions that roar (as in , ). Here, the first divine comment on this complacent society was not reasoned argument but a blood-curdling leonine “roar” that withers all vegetation from lowland pasture to Mount Carmel’s peak. dry up . . . withers. If literal, this suggests a devastating drought, often a mark of divine punishment, as it was for Ahab earlier (). If metaphoric, as is perhaps more likely, it is a chilling image of divine judgment (cf. ; ). Similarly the Sumerian Exaltation of Inanna acclaims: “When you roar at the earth like Thunder, no vegetation can stand up to you.”
Amos’s judgments first address neighboring nations. Such judgments are common in Israelite prophecy (cf. ; ; ) but are rare in other ancient traditions. There is no evidence that they were ever delivered to the named recipients. Rather, they are part of the prophet’s rhetorical strategy: here Amos is inviting agreement and sympathy from his immediate audience before addressing them directly.
Amos crisscrosses Israel: northeast (Damascus in ), southwest (Gaza/Philistia in ), northwest (Tyre in ), and finally southeast and east (Edom, Ammon, Moab in ). All these states were subdued by David and most were incorporated into his empire by treaty, though they all became independent on the death of Solomon. Their fortunes varied over the next two centuries, and by Amos’s time the northern states were increasingly threatened by Assyria.
These judgments against foreign nations are very similar in form, but each is slightly different. The opening numerical statement is the same (, , , , ; ), but other aspects often vary, e.g., the number of places named, the declaration of punishment, the length of the judgment, the concluding messenger formula. This shows skillful use of elegant variation.
Except for Judah (), the nations are condemned for what we call “crimes against humanity.” Even in ancient times certain activities were reprehensible to everyone. ◆
Nations and cities mentioned in Amos.
Go to
Go to
Damascus was the capital city of Israel’s powerful northeastern neighbor, called both Syria (from the Greek geographic term) and, more commonly, Aram. This was often the most influential neighbor in the entire region. In building his empire David conquered it, but it regained freedom in Solomon’s reign () and was then involved in seemingly incessant warfare with Israel (e.g., ; ). The Tell Dan Stele from the early divided monarchy recounts an Aramean defeat of the “House of David,” while the reuse of this broken stele in a wall at Dan indicates Israelite recapture of the town.
At one point this long-running feud was suspended while Aram and Israel joined forces against the expansionist Assyrians under Shalmaneser III. The Assyrians later fought a coalition of western kings including Ahab at Qarqar (on the Orontes River in Syria) in 853 BC. They boasted of victory, but this is unlikely since they then fought repeated campaigns against similar coalitions in 849, 848 and 845 BC. Eventually the Assyrians retreated, not to reappear for another half century.
The prophets were also concerned with Aram. Elijah was to anoint Hazael (); Elisha actually did this and wept as he foresaw its terrible effect (). Hazael duly made his coup d’état and soon defeated Israel, reducing its military to ten token chariots (). However, the Assyrians then returned and subdued Aram, leaving Israel free to expand territorially and progress economically. This was the key political factor behind Israel’s prosperity in the time of Amos.
Israel’s northeasterly region of Gilead was often invaded by Aram (cf. ), but there is no other record of the atrocity condemned here. Since Israel had long recovered all its territory, including Gilead, this judgment must indict Aram for a former crime, which apparently consisted of driving threshing sledges over prostrate prisoners. Shortly after Amos, the Assyrian Tiglath-Pileser III boasted of the region Bit-Sha’alli, “I threshed as though with a threshing sledge.”
God’s judgment would fall specifically on the royal dynasty of the usurper Hazael (843–796 BC) and his son Ben-Hadad III (796–770 BC), as well as on Damascus. It would also fall on the Valley of Aven and Beth Eden, two places mentioned because of their verbal associations (see the article “Playing With Place-Names”). The first plays on the name of a local valley (“Aven” means wickedness); the second, probably on the city-state Bit-Adini, located by the Euphrates River in the far north. With poetic justice, the Arameans would return to Kir, which Amos later cites as their place of origin (). Kir was probably just north of the Persian Gulf, since elsewhere it is linked with Elam/Persia (). Barely 20 years after this judgment, in 733–732 BC, the Assyrians duly fulfilled this prophecy ().
Israel’s writers generally enjoyed wordplays with names, and the prophets often made puns with place-names. The longest example is (see notes on ; see also the chart “
Another example of toying with names (though not used in Amos) is the so-called Atbash device. The name comes from the Hebrew consonants, T, B, Sh, which are, respectively, the first, last, second, and second-to-last letters of the Hebrew alphabet (the equivalent in English is A, Z, B, Y). In this cryptic device, the letters of a name counted from the beginning of the alphabet are replaced by those counted from the end, e.g., Babylon (BBL) becomes Sheshak (ShShK []), Chaldea becomes Leb Kamai (). ◆
Go to
We sometimes use “101” to mean “a great many.” We don’t mean “101” literally; the number simply conveys the idea of one more than an already large figure. Ancient Semitic peoples had a similar idiom; they would give a number and then add one more, usually to convey “enough and more than enough.” This pattern of “x then x+1” can be seen in several Biblical texts, particularly wisdom books: (; , ; ; ; , , , ; ). Similar examples can be found in Akkadian, Hittite, Egyptian, Ugaritic, Aramaic and Greek literature; e.g., Ugaritic texts use “seven brothers, eight mother’s sons.” ◆
Go to
Gaza was probably the largest of the Philistine cities. Here it represents the whole people, with the other cities mentioned later (v. ). Historically, the Philistines were Israel’s second most powerful enemy (see notes on ; ; ), and they were sometimes paired with Aram in prophetic texts (e.g., ; ). Here the Philistines are condemned for raiding Israelite villages and enslaving their inhabitants. The victims are unnamed, and could have been either neighboring Judahites or more northerly Israelites. Such raiding for slavery was common in the ancient world. The Philistines are also condemned in , where the prophet foretells God’s repayment in kind. Here Edom was possibly acting as Gaza’s agent to sell these unfortunate people (cf. ). While the Philistines’ punishment is very similar to that of the Arameans, no kings are named, perhaps because their kings ruled collectively. The Assyrian advance led to the conquest of Philistia in 734 BC and the ongoing suppression of various subsequent revolts.
Tyre was an ancient maritime city, built on an island just off the Mediterranean coast about 35 miles (56 kilometers) north of the Mount Carmel headland. Founded in the third millennium BC, it is mentioned in several ancient Near Eastern sources in the third and second millennia BC and frequently in Biblical texts in the first millennium BC. Tyre and Sidon were the two main Phoenician cities, with preeminence varying through time. See notes on ; .
For Edom, see notes on ; . Shortly after the time of Amos, the Edomites recaptured the southern port and held it from then onward. Later, when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, the treachery of the Edomites and their appropriation of Judahite land was bitterly denounced (; ; ; cf. also ). Edom, already featured in these judgments (, ), is now directly condemned for fighting its own “brother” (i.e., Israel and Judah), and doing so mercilessly. The former charge is often made elsewhere; the latter is stressed in three synonymous phrases (v. ), making this the most emotionally charged judgment. God would destroy its two key cities: Teman, the southern capital, and Bozrah, the northern fortress town.
For Ammon, see note on . The crime indicted here is not otherwise known, but it would fit well in the late ninth century BC, when Aram/Syria oppressed Gilead from the north (v. ; see note on vv. ), leaving Ammon unchallenged to attack from the east. Such assaults on pregnant women were occasionally featured in ancient warfare, especially when an army wanted to terrorize and decimate the local residents (see note on ). There are three other OT references to it, all in the ninth to eighth centuries BC. Elisha and Hosea predicted this fate for Israel itself (; ), and the usurper Menahem did this to a town that resisted his coup d’état in Israel’s anarchic final years (). There are also two Mesopotamian references from different periods to this practice.
In punishment, the capital city of Rabbah will again be breached and its hierarchy exiled. This judgment is the first to portray noisy battle (see also ) and the only one to envisage a violent storm. Tempest and whirlwind are common metaphors of battle in Akkadian sources, e.g., “I blew against the enemy like the onrush of a raging storm.” They are also frequently used in connection with Yahweh in Biblical texts (; ; ) and of warrior gods executing divine judgment in general.
For Moab, see notes on ; ; see also the article “
Judah was the sister kingdom of Israel, and the ancient rivalry between them doubtless engendered much applause for Amos from among the listening audience of the northern kingdom as Amos condemns his homeland. However, Judah is cited not for crimes against humanity, like the other nations, but for neglecting Yahweh’s law and breaking the first commandment. Archaeological discovery gives occasional support to the Biblical portrayal of idolatry in Judah and Israel.
In the light of political changes that took place at the beginning of the eighth century BC (Assyrian expansion and the capture of Damascus), Israel was able to widen its economic interests and restore its hegemony over a greater area of the Transjordan. In addition, both Israel and Judah will be ruled during the first half of the century by strong kings (Jeroboam II and Uzziah, respectively) with long reigns. This made it easier to establish a comprehensive economic policy that concentrated on the mass production of export items such as grain, olive oil and wine. Large areas of the Shephelah and the lowland valleys had already been given over to wheat production (). Now, in the eighth century BC, the elite were able to impose this economic policy on the small hill country farms and villages. As a result, previous agricultural strategies that attempted to distribute potential risks between herding and farming were given over to specific cash crops, and the smaller holdings of the peasant farmers, who were overburdened with debts, were enclosed into large estates. This very efficient use of the land, however, eliminated the mixed crops that had formerly been grown in the village culture and more quickly exhausted the soil. Fallowing and grazing animals on harvested fields would have been eliminated or rigidly controlled. Under this new policy, an attempt was made to increase exports to the extent that there was a real hunger problem for the peasant class, while the nobility and merchant class were able to indulge in the luxury goods supplied by their Phoenician trading partners. Thus, in addition to facing rising prices at home on basic goods, such as wheat and barley, the impoverished, former peasant farmers now found themselves forced into debt servitude or day labor. Seeing them ground under the heel of exploiting employers and cheated by greedy merchants who sold them adulterated or inferior grain for their meals, it is no wonder that Amos harangued the rich for their lack of concern for the poor. In such an atmosphere of social injustice, agricultural specialization and economic speculation, the prophet reminds the Israelites of their covenant obligations. Amos warns them that corrupt judges and dishonest businessmen can expect no mercy from an angry God. Similarly, in the twentieth-century BC Egyptian tale of the “Eloquent Peasant,” we find a commoner using impressive rhetoric to admonish the pharaoh about the importance of justice. ◆
Wheat in the Huleh Valley. Eighth-century kings concentrated on the mass production of export items such as grain, olive oil and wine.
Wikimedia Commons
Go to
For three sins of Israel, even for four. As Amos hones in on his main target, he begins with not just one sin but several sins: enslavement, judicial corruption, sexual perversion, and economic exploitation. sell the innocent. May be a specific example of judicial corruption rather than the slavery condemned previously. a pair of sandals. Either indicates a trifling amount, refers proverbially to bypassing legal traditions enacted by sandal removal (cf. ; ), or is a mistranslation of a rare synonym for “bribe.”
use the same girl. Does not refer to general or cultic prostitution, since the sin here is that father and son are both involved. More likely this is exploitation of female bond servants who marry into the household (; cf. ) but are not given proper honor and protection.
garments taken in pledge. They should be returned to the poor before sunset (; ), since they were needed as blankets.
Amos was chronologically the first of the “writing prophets,” i.e., those whose preaching was preserved with other material in books named after them. But he was certainly not the first prophet. In the Pentateuch the term is used of Abraham, Miriam, the 70 elders, the non-Israelite Balaam, and of course Moses, the prophet par excellence. In the premonarchy era there were the prophetess Deborah, an unnamed prophet (), Samuel, and various groups of prophets, while in the united monarchy we read of Gad and Nathan. Then in the two centuries or so of the divided kingdoms before Amos, there was a long succession of prophets: Ahijah, Shemaiah, Jehu, Micaiah, Elijah and Elisha, as well as many unnamed individuals, and the ‘sons of the prophets’ with whom Elijah and Elisha associated. And of course there were many false prophets in Israel, including the prophets of Baal and Asherah.
There was great variety in all aspects of prophetic activity and life. The groups of Samuel’s time prophesied in an ecstatic frenzy, which enveloped Saul when he met them. Similarly, Elisha requested the stimulus of music in order to prophesy. By contrast, Nathan confronted David after his terrible sin with a carefully prepared story. Many of these prophets seemed to live on their own, while others seemed to share a communal life. Some lived in the country and were visited by ordinary people on “high days and holy days,” while others lived in the city and were consulted by royalty.
There may have been development over time. An important aside in the Samuel story tells us that the term “prophet” replaced the older term “seer” (although “prophet” also occurs in the early accounts, and “man of God” occurs in various texts). The groups of prophets prevalent in the times of Samuel (eleventh century BC) and Elisha (ninth century BC) seem to have faded from view by the time of Amos (eighth century BC). Perhaps they offered social and spiritual responses to oppression and apostasy that were more appropriate in some periods than in others.
Recent discoveries and study have revealed much about prophets in other ancient Near Eastern societies. It is hardly surprising that they existed; any society that believes in contact between the human and the divine will inevitably have human intermediaries. This material is being increasingly studied, and one writer notes that “the more we learn about the non-Israelite version [of prophecy], the less wide the gap between it and its Israelite counterpart appears.” Certainly there are many similarities of social function and oracular form. Yet certain key differences remain. Non-Israelite prophecy almost entirely lacks three important features: a sense of prophetic call, a challenge to king and people, and an ethical concern. These loom large in Biblical prophecy, not the least in Amos. ◆
Go to
Nazirites. See the article “
The swift . . . the strong . . . the warrior . . . The archer . . . the fleet-footed soldier . . . the horseman . . . the bravest warriors. The entire Israelite military force is covered by this sevenfold description. The term “bravest warriors” (v. ) probably means “charioteers,” since chariots were a common feature of ancient warfare from early times in, e.g., Egypt (), Canaan (), Philistines (), Israel () and Syria (). However, shows that armies could also have cavalry, though it is unclear when cavalry became widespread; some 50 years later the Assyrians mocked Judah for having so few men able to ride horses. Amos declares that all these powerful forces cannot withstand divine judgment.
chosen. The Hebrew verb means “know.” The same idiom of a god knowing a family is used in Akkadian texts to describe the care that family gods provide for their worshipers.
The seven rhetorical questions in these verses stress that every effect has a cause, and the seventh question makes clear that the coming disaster will be caused by the Lord. The images give cameos of ordinary life: traveling together, growling lions, bird hunting, and warning of danger.
trumpet. The shofar; it was made of a ram’s horn and was used in ordinary contexts and in religious celebrations as well as to signal danger (see note on ).
“Sovereign LORD” is Amos’s favorite title for God, occurring 21 times in the book of Amos. It is literally “Lord Yahweh” (Hebrew adonay yhwh). However, by the late postexilic era many Jews felt that, in order not to misuse the name of Yahweh (), they should not pronounce it at all. So instead they used the title “Lord” (Hebrew adonay) whenever they came to yhwh in the Hebrew text. This practice was continued when they translated their Scriptures into Greek. Thus the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) and other translations use the Greek equivalent kurios (Lord) when translating the Hebrew yhwh. This is one reason the NT often refers to God as “Lord.” Most English Bible translations have followed this precedent, representing the Hebrew yhwh by the word “LORD” (using small capitals to distinguish it from adonay, “Lord”). See the article “
In light of this, the compound Hebrew name adonay yhwh in Amos and elsewhere obviously poses a problem for translators. To read it as adonay adonay or to translate it as “Lord LORD” would sound odd. So when yhwh immediately follows adonay, the Jewish tradition was to read it not as a second adonay but as elohim (“God”). Many English translations follow this practice with “Lord GOD” (again using small capitals for GOD). However, the NIV takes a different line, and translates “Sovereign LORD.” While this is not an exact translation, it captures something of the force of bringing the two words together. And it is very appropriate in the book of Amos, which stresses Yahweh’s sovereignty. ◆
Go to
An enemy. Overshadowing the preaching of Amos but unmentioned in the book is the emerging power of Assyria. Assyria had been an important empire in the fourteenth to eleventh centuries BC but then declined. In the ninth century BC it reemerged and advanced westward, to be checked by western states at Qarqar in 853 BC. A decade later the Assyrians conducted another campaign westward and exacted tribute from Jehu, as portrayed on the Black Obelisk now in the British Museum. However, these were more raids than conquests, and they then remained beyond Israel’s horizon for nearly a century. But now, in the mid-eighth century BC, they are again advancing westward. Amos sees this ominous development but doesn’t name them; a little later Hosea names them repeatedly. In 722 BC Assyria conquered Samaria and exiled many Israelites ().
As a shepherd rescues . . . two leg bones or a piece of an ear. In Israel () and elsewhere, a shepherd was not responsible for animals devoured by wild beasts. However, he had to provide evidence, hence the need to rescue any uneaten bones and scraps. This powerful image is applied to Israel: only a few useless scraps will remain.
altars of Bethel. After the division of the nation of Israel into the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, Israel’s first king, Jeroboam I, built temples at Dan in the north and Bethel in the south of his new kingdom to prevent its people from traveling to Jerusalem (). The Dan temple faded from view, while the Bethel one became the national and royal shrine (cf. ) and received repeated prophetic censure. This is the only reference to Bethel altars in the plural—presumably the main altar was complemented by others. horns of the altar. See notes on ; .
winter house . . . summer house . . . houses adorned with ivory . . . mansions. The four types of residence mentioned here clearly include the whole range of wealthy homes, all to be swept away in divine judgment (similarly in ). Ahab had a summer residence in the capital city of Samaria and a winter one in the warmer Jezreel Valley (, ). His city palace was even “adorned with ivory” (), a sign of wealth and prestige (cf. , which describes a royal wedding). A century later many others had apparently followed Ahab’s example of extravagance, since excavations at Samaria have revealed many fine ivory decorations that testify to a luxurious lifestyle. These display sphinxes (i.e., cherubim), palm fronds typical of Bronze Age ivories, and a variety of animal, human and other newer motifs that show both Egyptian and Syrian influences. They were probably all luxurious imports.
cows of Bashan. Bashan was the fertile tableland northeast of the Jordan. It was prime cattle country, and its animals were renowned. Here it is used as a stinging epithet for the capital’s women, who are rich, idle, pampered and inevitably fatter than those whom they have reduced to poverty.
hooks . . . fishhooks. The exact meaning of these two terms is uncertain. If this common translation is correct, the verse may refer to a standard form of Assyrian cruelty to captives that is depicted in many reliefs and texts. In any case, it presages humiliating treatment.
Harmon. Since this word occurs only here, there have been a number of suggestions on its meaning. Some scholars consider it a place-name and thus the place where the captives are exiles. Among the suggestions here are Mount Minni in Assyria (see ) or Hermal, near Kadesh on the Orontes River. For those who emend the text, the translation of “dung heap” for hadmon (exchanging a single letter) is the most likely, since it is a suitable place for the disposal of the bodies of prisoners.
Amos’s impressive array of rhetorical devices includes sarcastic mockery. Gilgal lay in the Jordan Valley just northeast of Jericho. It became an important cult center alongside Bethel (cf. ; ; ). The sacrifices and offerings mentioned here echo those prescribed in , though the northern kingdom may have developed its own versions in its schismatic worship (cf. ).
years. Lit. “days” (see ). It may refer to (1) an otherwise unknown practice of offering tithes on the third day of pilgrimage, (2) tithes offered every few days (“three” in Hebrew sometimes means “several”), or (3) possibly the triennial tithe (cf. ; the Hebrew “days” in the plural sometimes indicates extended time). Whatever their exact rhythm, tithes, like offerings, were plentiful.
empty stomachs. Translates the Hebrew idiom “cleanness of teeth,” which refers not to dental hygiene but to famine. This must have been a recent experience, sufficiently within memory to be meaningful to Amos’s audience. Drought and famine have been perpetual dangers in Palestine.
Locusts. Locust swarms are still an occasional menace, devastating everything in their path, and are well attested elsewhere in the ancient Near East. A Mari letter from a millennium earlier complains: “On account of the locusts my district could not harvest [anything].” All the natural disasters mentioned in vv. were clearly a divine warning.
I killed. Probably refers to the Syrian oppression some 50 years earlier (see note on ), the most recent period of sustained subjugation.
lament. Laments over death, or “funerary laments” (as distinct from psalm laments), were common in the ancient world. Well-known examples are of David for Saul and Jonathan (), and Gilgamesh for Enkidu in the Gilgamesh Epic (see note on ).
Virgin. This title might be better translated “Maiden” or “Mistress,” since the analogy has more to do with youthful potential than sexual innocence. The Hebrew term means a young, reputable woman who is still under her father’s protection. The title also occurs in ; ; it is similar to the expression “Daughter X” used in the OT (e.g., ; ) and other ancient literature.
Pleiades and Orion. See note on .
though you . . . you will not. The curse used here is called a “futility curse” (so all of their effort and success will be futile) and could be compared to an inscription on a Babylonian boundary stone calling on the gods to see that anyone who builds a house on stolen land should have the house taken from them. stone mansions. Lit. “houses of dressed stone,” the term used for the stone of the temple (; ). In ancient Israel most dwellings were made of mud brick, and stone was only used for monumental buildings like temples and palaces, walls and gates. So individuals who could afford to build with dressed stone were very wealthy.
In ancient Israel, justice was administered at the local level. The book of Deuteronomy mentions several layers of administration, of which the village elders and local judges constituted the most important. There was a court of appeal, though it is hard to know how often or how well it functioned. Various kings may have attempted to centralize and control it, but David’s failure to manage it efficiently allowed Absalom to foment rebellion (). Most of the laws imply that disputes should be settled at the village level. This was far more satisfactory in a traditional society that had no police or prison system and where local knowledge was all-important.
The public area in Israelite villages was just inside the gates (see note on ). Here the men would gather, swap stories, conduct business, and settle disputes, as is neatly illustrated in . The law warns severely against partiality to either rich or poor () and against bribery and corruption (), but the repeated complaint of Amos and his fellow prophets is that the rich found ways around this.
In ancient Mesopotamia justice was usually administered “at the gate” as well, though in its more centralized society there were some professional judges. However, it was equally firm against corruption. The Code of Hammurapi, section 5, stipulates: “If a judge gave a judgment . . . but later has altered his judgment . . . he shall pay twelvefold the claim which holds in that case; furthermore, they shall expel him in the assembly from his seat of judgment and he shall never again sit with the judges in a case.” ◆
Gate chambers and passageway of the upper gate at Dan.
Kim Walton
Go to
courts. Lit. “gates.”
, wailing. See the article “
the day of the LORD. We do not know when this concept originated, except that by the mid-eighth century BC it was current in Israel. As to how it originated, two views are proposed. (1) Some think it comes from the concept of “holy warfare” or “Yahweh warfare,” i.e., battles conducted at God’s bequest, with his aid, and often with annihilation of the enemy. The “day of the LORD” thus meant the day of victorious battle, and the phrase came to depict the expected glorious future. (2) Others trace it to a great festival in the autumn celebrating Yahweh as Israel’s God and King. The “day of the LORD” thus referred to this annual event and, by extension, to the time when his rule would bring peace and prosperity to all. Neither view is certain. What is clear, however, is that Amos reversed popular expectation by proclaiming that the “day of the LORD” would bring unrelieved “pitch-dark” gloom (v. ). Amos does this with a string of vivid metaphors in vv. —the ancient equivalent of “out of the frying pan, into the fire.”
As the NIV text note reveals, this verse is difficult, with many words ambiguous. In the first pair, Sakkuth could be “shrine” or a name, and “your king” (root m-l-k) could be the underworld deity Molek or the Ammonite deity Milkom. In the second pair, “pedestal” could be the name Kaiwan—the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) gives this as Rephan, the form that is then quoted in . Clearly the prophet denounces idolatry, but its exact form is uncertain. One common view, reflected in the NIV text, is that the prophet condemns various cult objects: “shrine,” “pedestal” and “star.” Amos’s contemporary Hosea also mentions various cultic accoutrements that were revered by the Israelites and of which they would soon be deprived (e.g., ; ). Sometimes these were lifted up and paraded in the ancient world, as illustrated in graphic art. This fits the general context, though it is not the easiest way to read the Hebrew words. The other common view, reflected in the NIV text note and argued by many commentators, is that a form of astral worship is condemned. The word translated “shrine” is really “Sakkuth” and “pedestal” is “Kaiwan”—corrupted forms of names for the god Saturn known from various lists from Mesopotamia, Ebla and Ugarit. This implies that by this stage Israel had succumbed to the worship of heavenly bodies, as did many of its neighbors, and as did Judah a century later (cf. Josiah’s reforms, ).
exile beyond Damascus. Since the Assyrians are never directly mentioned in Amos, it is unclear that this is what he meant when he spoke of the coming exile of the people of Israel. Using such an imprecise phrase as “beyond Damascus” is reminiscent of Jeremiah’s threat “from the north” (), and both simply indicate the direction of Mesopotamia as the source of the coming destruction.
Mount Samaria. For Amos’s parallelism to work most effectively, Mount Samaria would have to also contain a worship center, just as Mount Zion does in Jerusalem. It is likely a reference to the acropolis section of the city, where the temple and palace would be located. Considering Micah’s condemnation of Samaria and its idols () and Isaiah’s reference to “Samaria and her idols” (), it seems likely that Israel’s capital had a major shrine during the reign of Jeroboam II.
Kalneh. The capital of a late-Hittite state in north-central Syria, roughly halfway between the northeastern corner of the Mediterranean Sea and the Euphrates River. It was conquered briefly by the Assyrians under Shalmaneser III in the mid-ninth century BC (859–853 BC), but it is not mentioned again in their records until the mid-eighth century BC, in reference to reconquest in 739 BC by Tiglath-Pileser III after a revolt. Hamath. An important city-state on the Orontes River, roughly halfway between Kalneh to the north and Damascus to the south. Like Kalneh it was conquered by Shalmaneser III in 859 BC, but then joined the western coalition that checked the Assyrians at Qarqar in 853 BC. In the following years they lost some territory but soon recovered it. Like Kalneh it was reconquered in 739 BC, but its history immediately before this is unclear. Gath. One of the five chief cities of the Philistines.
There are three ways to understand these historical references. (1) Amos is referring to the defeats of these cities a century previously. Though a long time ago, they were memorable, and the lesson still valuable. (2) Amos refers to their conquest by Assyria in the immediately preceding years. While there are no extant records of this, it provides a suitable context for the revolt and reconquest in 739 BC. (3) This section comes not from “before the earthquake” () but from after 739 BC, when their defeat provided a chilling warning.
The lesson from Philistine Gath could refer to (1) possible capture by the Syrians under Hazael in a southern campaign against nearby Jerusalem in the late ninth century BC (), (2) capture by Judah under Uzziah in the first half of the eighth century BC (), or (3) capture by Tiglath-Pileser in 734 BC as the Assyrians advanced farther south.
beds adorned with ivory. The idea of a bed made from some exotic or luxurious material is reminiscent of king Og’s iron bed in (see also Solomon’s ivory throne in ). Sennacherib’s Assyrian annals mention that Judah’s king Hezekiah included a couch inlaid with ivory among his tribute items. Ivory decor was very popular at this time for inlays in furniture and for wall panels. One of the principal sources of ivory was elephant tusks, which were imported from Aram (where Syrian elephants were not yet extinct at this time).
harps . . . musical instruments. See the article “
wine. The ancient world had beer, wine and strong drink, just like today. Wine in the OT could be a sign of divine favor () and an element of true worship (), but drinking to excess or in idle luxury was frequently condemned. Here “the bowlful” probably indicates excess. Ancient art shows wine served in bowls, and various excavations have uncovered such bowls. lotions. The use of fine oils or lotions for cosmetic, hygienic and therapeutic purposes was widespread in the ancient Near East, and in the OT oil is often coupled with wine in descriptions of pleasure (e.g., ). A large number of ostraca recovered from eighth-century BC Samaria record various commercial transactions and tax payments, and a dozen of these mention “refined oil.”
feasting. The Hebrew noun marzeah occurs only here and in , where it is linked to mourning (NIV “funeral meal”). However, the root mrzh occurs throughout the ancient Semitic world in reference to drinking and occasionally eating, in celebration or commiseration. The marzeah was often a social institution, sometimes with members and at a specified location, with elements variously of a pub, a drinking den, a London gentlemen’s club, a Masonic lodge, an annual fete, and an Irish wake. It could be associated with death, as in , but its primary connotation was drinking. Here it connotes feasting—soon to be abruptly ended.
These verses portray the horrific aftermath of destruction, describing a houseful of dead bodies being discovered by a relative. He searches for survivors but is promptly told not even to mention Yahweh’s name, presumably lest further catastrophe strike.
burn them. Cremation was generally abhorred in Israel and beyond. The few OT exceptions concerned not normal corpse disposal but exemplary capital punishment: Achan’s sin after Jericho (), and serious sexual misconduct (; ). The men of Jabesh Gilead burned the corpses of Saul and his sons, but this was respectful, partial (since they then buried the bones), and probably necessary for hygiene given the delay following their death (). Earlier in Amos (), the Moabites are fiercely condemned for burning the king of Edom’s bones. So here cremation may have been used as a last resort in an emergency, perhaps to avoid disease.
Lo Debar. A town usually located just east of the Jordan in Ammonite territory. It is mentioned in several texts, with slightly variant spellings, but here it is spelled mockingly as “Nothing” (see the article “Playing With Place-Names”). Karnaim. A town north of Lo Debar in Transjordan, east of the Sea of Kinnereth (Galilee). The name means lit. “horns,” a common symbol of strength. But whether the town captured was “Nothingville” or “Stronghold,” the Israelites’ boasting was futile.
from Lebo Hamath to the valley of the Arabah. Again a section ends with prediction of defeat and oppression. Lebo Hamath. Means “Gate of Hamath.” It lay north of Damascus about halfway to Hamath itself. It is sometimes referred to as the northern edge of ideal Israel (; ), though the nation seldom reached that far. Israel captured it (and probably the towns of v. ) during the expansion by Jeroboam II in the decades before Amos’s ministry (cf. ). This will only result in more territory for Assyrian oppression. valley of the Arabah. Mentioned only here, it was a wadi at the northern end of the Dead Sea marking Israel’s southern boundary.
swarms of locusts. This first vision (vv. ) is of God preparing a locust swarm to devastate the country (see note on ). after the king’s share . . . just as the late crops were coming up. The detail of the crops and the timing of the plague are particularly important. There were two main crops each year in ancient Israel. The first was sown in the autumn, watered by the late autumn rains and harvested in the spring. The second was sown in winter, watered by the spring rains and harvested in the early summer. The Gezer calendar gives a good summary of the agricultural year. This probably remained the pattern in later centuries, though there is no other extra-Biblical textual evidence. share. This Hebrew term (lit. “mowing”) is used only here. This was obviously some or all of the first harvest. Whatever the proportion, it shows that the king took a significant part of the best produce in a heavy tax. The timing of the plague means that the monarchy already has its share so may remain unconcerned about the plight of the ordinary people, whose share is completely wiped out as locusts “stripped the land clean” (v. ). Lack of rain during the long dry summer would make further crops impossible, resulting in famine and starvation.
forgive. This Hebrew verb is used in the OT only of divine forgiveness, e.g., following the wilderness rebellion (), in Solomon’s temple prayer () and in a memorable Isaianic text (). Here Amos fulfills the important OT prophetic role of interceding on behalf of the people, a role not evidenced for prophets in other cultures, where divination priests or incantation priests might more likely serve this role. His appeal is based not on Israel’s repentance but implicitly on God’s relationship with Israel, which would cease if the nation was wiped out.
This second vision develops a common motif. This fire even consumes “the great deep,” the cosmic deep beneath the earth that is the source of its seas and river and is sometimes associated with the underworld.
The meaning of this vision is clear: Yahweh uses a handheld instrument that has some association with a wall to illustrate coming judgment. However, the Hebrew text is less clear (see note on v. ).
plumb line. The Hebrew term translated “plumb line” has the same stem as the Akkadian term annaku. The latter was thought to mean “tin or lead,” hence the interpretation as “lead weight” (i.e., plumb line). However, recent study suggests that annaku means specifically “tin,” not lead, and tin is too light to make an effective plumb line. Various other proposals have been made concerning the meaning of the term and the nature of the vision, but none is convincing. Whatever Amos sees in Yahweh’s hand, he understands it as an illustration of judgment.
Amos is raising a conspiracy. Throughout the ancient world it was believed that prophets not only proclaimed the message of deity but also in the process unleashed the divine action (see the article “
Earn your bread there. Amaziah’s charge that Amos is a professional (“for hire”) prophet implies that Amaziah has no concept of any other form of prophetic ministry.
king’s sanctuary . . . temple of the kingdom. These descriptions of Bethel occur only here in the OT. However, it was common for ancient Near Eastern monarchs to exercise patronage over sanctuaries; in the Jerusalem temple there was even a special entrance for the king.
neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet. Amos immediately responds to Amaziah’s charge (see note on v. ) by declaring that he is a farmer (see note on ) called by God for a specific prophetic mission. Amos had a clear sense of divine call, something well attested in other Biblical prophets but not in prophetic texts from surrounding cultures (see the article “
In response to Amaziah’s prohibition (v. ), Amos delivers a specific personal prophecy of destitution and death. This is similar to curses elsewhere; e.g., a treaty of the Assyrian Ashurnirari says, “May Mati’ilu become like a prostitute and his soldiers women. May they receive gifts like a prostitute in the square of the city.”
In this vision Amos sees a basket of ripe fruit. The Hebrew writers loved wordplays. Here “ripe fruit” (qayits, usually figs) is punned with “end” (qets). Wordplays do not translate easily from one language to another, but the NIV does well to match “ripe fruit” with “the time is ripe.” Ripe fruit normally means harvest celebration; here it presages ripeness for judgment.
As Nehemiah discovered several centuries later in Persian-period Jerusalem, the desire of merchants to conduct business sometimes makes their compliance with religious law and Sabbath regulations a matter for complaint or even circumvention (see note on ). There were religious festivals in surrounding cultures (see note on ), but only Israel was commanded to obey the Sabbath law and cease all work (). This restriction on trade caused friction and apparently contributed to corrupt business practices as a way of “making up” the losses. skimping . . . boosting . . . cheating. Certainly, Amos’s complaints against Israelite merchants are not unique; e.g., the charge made against merchants that they use false balances is found in the Egyptian “Instruction of Amenemope” and in a clause in the Babylonian wisdom literature. Similarly, the Code of Hammurapi contains a statement about bankers who “use a light scale to measure the grain or the silver that they lend and a heavy scale to measure the grain or the silver that they collect.”
sweepings with the wheat. In their efforts to squeeze as much profit as possible from their holdings, grain merchants cheat the poor by selling the “husks” of the wheat. A similar charge is made in the Egyptian tale of the “Eloquent Peasant” against those who “substitute lesser for better goods.” sweepings. This Hebrew word occurs only here, but it is related to the Hebrew word meaning “to fall” and reflects the poorest quality or that which is left over.
rise . . . then sink like the river of Egypt. Egyptian agriculture relied heavily on the annual flooding of the Nile. The waters would flood in September and recede in October, leaving a short winter period for cultivation crops. Occasionally the flood was too weak, with catastrophic results, and Egyptian texts often note “a year of low Nile” with hunger and misery. The powerful image of a rising and flooding river occurs in a variety of prophetic contexts. Here it may well be another prediction of the coming earthquake () that would convulse the solid earth as if it was water. The imagery is repeated in .
sun go down at noon. Since a lunar or solar eclipse was considered a portent of evil or the anger of the gods in the ancient Near East, there are many citations in the literature. Among them is the prediction by the prophet Balaam in the Deir ‘Alla inscription that the divine assembly has decided to “bring darkness instead of light.” Priests of the moon-god Sin in Babylonia would wear torn garments and sing dirges during an eclipse, and there are numerous letters and omen texts in Babylonian and Assyrian records referring to eclipses. Many are written to kings either warning them of a coming eclipse or assuring the monarch that they will be kept informed of the likelihood of coming occurrences. For Biblical examples, see ; .
from sea to sea. Used fairly often by the Biblical writers (e.g., ; ) to distinguish east and west (from the Mediterranean west to the Dead Sea or the Jordan River). A similar expression occurs in the Karatepe Stele, where “from sunrise to sunset” (cf. ) is used for east to west or a sense of universality. Since it is combined here with “north to east,” it is possible that it defines the southern latitudinal border of the northern kingdom. In their staggering search for water during the drought, the people will search from one end of the kingdom to the other. from north to east. The southern boundary has been defined in the previous line, and the western boundary is, of course, the Mediterranean. From Bethel one could still search to the Galilee region to the north, heading for places like Samaria or Dan, and to the east, whether Beth Shan or the Transjordan territory of Gilead.
swear by. The focus of worship is clear only for Dan, where it is “your god.” For Samaria, it is “the sin” (some translations, “shame”), an unusual but understandable epithet for the “calf of Samaria” (). Adding different vowels would give Ashima, but worship of this goddess was only introduced later by deportees from Hamath (). For Beersheba, the puzzling focus of worship is lit. “the way [derek] of Beersheba.” Perhaps derek here does not have its common meaning “way” but is a rare homonym meaning “power.”
Unlike the first four visions (, , ; ), Amos here is merely a spectator as Yahweh proclaims horrendous judgment, to be enacted presumably by the Assyrians on the Bethel temple. The tops (or capitals) of the pillars supporting the roof will be smashed so violently that the building will be destroyed down to its foundations, and leaders and commoners alike will be slaughtered. The Assyrians, like most ancient conquerors, executed leaders of conquered peoples and any they deemed to be rebels. Sargon, who eventually captured Samaria, boasted regarding a rebel Hittite: “Himself I flayed; the rebels I killed in their cities and established [again] peace and harmony.”
none will escape. Five flight scenarios are envisaged in the following verses, with two opposing pairs from the cosmic world (underworld, heavens) and the natural world (mountain, seas), and a single scenario in the human world. None of these provides escape from divine retribution. A fourteenth-century BC Amarna letter similarly affirms that neither heaven nor underworld provide escape from the Egyptian pharaoh.
depths below. Lit. “Sheol.” Its reference to the cosmic extremity of the underworld is clear here from its parallelism with “heavens.” A repeated Biblical theme is that the dead in Sheol are cut off from Yahweh and can no longer praise or petition him. However, another repeated theme reflected here is that God’s authority extends even to Sheol, and nothing there is hidden from him. See the articles “
the serpent. Many ancient cultures envisaged a great sea monster or serpent (see the article “
rises . . . then sinks like the river of Egypt. See note on .
lofty palace in the heavens. Amos’s attempt to express God’s complete control over all creation begins with a multistoried or many chambered sanctuary or palace in the heavens (cf. ; ). These “upper chambers” () bind together the vaults of heaven while at the same time they rest upon the waters. A precedent for these lofty chambers is found in the Enuma Elish, which contains a description of the building of the Esagila temple to Marduk in Babylon in which the gods “built a stage-tower as high as Apsu [= heaven].” In the Biblical and ancient Near Eastern view, the cosmos was a temple and the temple was a microcosmos.
Cushites. See note on . Philistines. See notes on ; ; . Arameans. See notes on ; .
as grain is shaken in a sieve. The work of processing harvested grain included crushing the stalks on the threshing floor with a sled, winnowing (see note on ), and finally using a sieve to separate the kernels of grain from small stones and other debris. The sieve mentioned here has large holes and works best when shaken sideways and in a circular motion. This ordinarily forces the debris to the sides and allows the kernels to fall to the ground, where they can be collected (see Sirach 27:4).
David’s fallen shelter. This unique expression may well refer to the united monarchy that “fell” in schism on the death of Solomon. God promises to restore it “as it used to be”—the same Hebrew phrase is used by Amos’s contemporary Micah (“as in days long ago,” ) in similar reference to past prosperity.
Edom and all the nations. Control over bitter rival Edom (see note on ) and other neighbors represents a return to the political unity and hegemony of David’s time ().
They will plant vineyards . . . I will plant Israel. The obvious wordplay reinforces this wonderful concluding prophecy of agricultural replenishment and national renewal. The exile is over; the new and secure order has come.