8CPa
Eighth-Century Prophecy
The prophetic books of the OT begin somewhat late in the history of Israel and Judah. The tribes settled in the land around 1200 BCE and David’s reign begins around 1000 BCE, but the prophets, whose oracles are collected in the prophetic books, do not enter the stage until the middle of the 8th century BCE.
Classical prophecy emerges on the eve of the Assyrian empire and Israel's loss of independence.
So why at this moment? It can be helpful to step back from the literature of the OT to consider the wider stage of the ancient world. Simultaneous with the emergence of the OT prophets was the rise of Tiglath-pileser III to the throne, who transformed Assyria from a kingdom to an empire. Israel and Judah were about to lose their political independence and become vassal states absorbed within a foreign empire. The default mode of thinking within the wider Semitic culture would lead to the conclusion that the army victorious on the battlefield had the superior patron deity. The patron deity of the subjugated state would simply be absorbed within the pantheon of the victorious deity. In other words, without the predictive and explanatory word of the OT prophets, Yahwism might have ended right there.
When the 8th- century prophets preached, little of the Bible had been "published" to the people.
The table of contents of the Bible places the Pentateuch (Torah in the Hebrew Bible) and the historical books (the Former Prophets in the Hebrew Bible) before the (Latter) Prophets.
But if we are to enter the world of the eighth-century prophets, we must recognize that little of the Bible had yet been “published” to the people of Israel and Judah. The first explicit mention of the public reading of a biblical book during the monarchy comes during the reign of Josiah in 622 BCE (2 Kgs 22–23)—a full century after the eighth-century prophets. So we cannot assume that they and especially their audiences knew the full story of the Hebrews, along with their covenant with Yahweh at Mount Sinai. What they knew and what they did not know we will have to reconstruct when we examine the traditions embedded in these prophetic books.
Amos
1. Canonical and Historical Context: Who’s on stage?
Amos preaches during the reign of Jeroboam II (786–746 BCE) while the northern kingdom of Israel still enjoyed political independence. Shortly after the Israelite king’s death Tiglath-pileser III came to the throne of Assyria, and he would transform his kingdom into an empire, eventually incorporating Israel as a vassal. The lack of any explicit reference to an Assyrian threat confirms the dating within Jeroboam’s lifetime.
Shortly after the ministry of Amos, Hosea delivers his message to northern Israel. Later in the 8th century, Isaiah and Micah preach to the southern kingdom of Judah.
2. Outline and Key Passages
(coming later)
3. Situation and Message: What’s at Stake?
While studying the Old Testament, it is easy to get lost in the texts themselves without giving due attention to the wider issues reflected in these texts.
What is the purpose of religion? Why did God choose a people?
The book of Amos profoundly addresses the fundamental question, what is the purpose of religion? For whose benefit is it: the deity’s, the worshiper’s, or the wider society’s? Is it a private or public matter? It also addresses the fundamental theological question of “election,” that is, does God have a “chosen people,” and if so, is this a privilege or responsibility, or both?
Yahweh called Amos to preach a message of judgment on Israel's official religion when it appeared the nation was prospering under God's blessing.
Amos at Bethel (Amos 7:10–17). Amos’s ministry was centered at Bethel, a royal sanctuary just north of Israel’s border with Judah—during the reign of Jeroboam II (Amos 1:1).
Observing his social location helps to make sense of the striking contrast in the nearly contemporary ministries of Amos and Hosea, who preached to the same generation in northern Israel. Hosea’s ministry focused on popular religion (i.e., the religion of the common people), where both Yahweh and Baal were worshiped. He identified Israel’s principal sins as infidelity and idolatry. These sins barely surface in the book of Amos. His indictments focused on the official religion of the state of Israel, whose patron was Yahweh. As a result, he was confronted by Amaziah, “the priest of Bethel.” He invoked royal and priestly privilege over against any prophetic criticism: “but at Bethel you shall not again prophesy, for it is the king’s sanctuary, and it is a house/temple of the kingdom” (Amos 7:13). According to 1 Kings, Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom of Israel, had instituted sanctuaries in Bethel and Dan, as alternatives to the Jerusalem temple, and he appointed non-Levitical priests at Bethel (1 Kgs 12:26–33).
The odds were stacked against Amos. Jeroboam II enjoyed a long forty-year reign during a time of agricultural and economic prosperity, which his subjects would have interpreted as a sign of Yahweh’s blessing on his kingdom. The “haves” in Israel had considerable wealth: winter and summer houses (Amos 3:15–4:1), and parties with rich feasting and imbibing (Amos 6:4–6). In fact, he expanded Israel’s borders—apparently with God’s blessing.
“He restored the border of Israel from Lebo-hamath as far as the Sea of the Arabah, according to the word of the Lord, the God of Israel, which he spoke by his servant Jonah son of Amittai, the prophet, who was from Gath-hepher” (2 Kgs 14:25, NRSV).
No one, especially those in power, wanted to hear doom and gloom when the kingdom was clearly prospering. Yet Amos appears to mimic Jonah’s earlier prophecy, but this time to notify Israel of its reversal:
Indeed, I am raising up against you a nation,
O house of Israel, says the Lord, the God of hosts,
and they shall oppress you from Lebo-hamath
to the Wadi Arabah (Amos 6:14, NRSV).
Amos suffered another disadvantage: he was a foreigner from the rival state of Judah. He also lacked prophetic credentials: “I am no prophet, nor a prophet’s son; but I am a herdsman, and a dresser of sycamore trees, and the Lord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said to me, ‘Go, prophesy to my people Israel’” (Amos 7:14–15, NRSV). He describes himself as “a herdsman and a picker of sycamore figs” (Amos 7:14). The superscript of the book describes him similarly as one of the “sheep-breeders [nqd] from Tekoa,” just south of Bethlehem in Judah. This term does not necessarily place Amos among the so-called working-class, as this role is also attributed to Mesha king of Moab (2 Kings 3:4) and to high officials in ancient Ugarit. The perils of his situation could be compared to a corporate farmer from Pennsylvania being called to preach in Atlanta just prior to the Civil War in the United States! Not surprisingly, Amaziah orders him to go home and mocks him as a “seer” who “drivels” or “foams at the mouth” like an ecstatic (Amos 7:16, literal).
Finally, Amaziah misquotes Amos and accuses him of conspiracy against the king. He quotes him as saying:
“For thus Amos has said,
‘Jeroboam shall die by the sword,
and Israel must go into exile
away from his land.’ ” (Amos 7:11, NRSV)
This claim seems problematic because 2 Kings 14:29 indicates that Jeroboam died of natural causes. We can search the book of Amos for confirmation of this claim, but the closest oracles are these below. The first comes from the passage immediately preceding.
The high places of Isaac shall be made desolate,
and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste,
and I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword.” (Amos 7:9, NRSV)
But do not seek Bethel,
and do not enter into Gilgal
or cross over to Beer-sheba;
for Gilgal shall surely go into exile,
and Bethel shall come to nothing. (Amos 5:5, NRSV)
According to Amos’s own words, the sword threatens “the house of Jeroboam,” that is, his dynasty and kingdom—not the king personally.
Oracles against the Nations (Amos 1:3–2:16). Given his uphill battle, the final redaction of the book of Amos suggests that the prophet employed a shrewd rhetorical device to gain traction with his Israelite audience.
Yahweh judges Israel's neighboring states for general acts of inhumanity, but judges Judah and then Israel for violations against Yahweh's teaching.
He begins his indictments with the nations and cities bordering Israel, each of whom was a rival and threat: Damascus, Philistine cities (Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron), Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and most importantly Amos’s own Judah. One can imagine the rising crescendo of “Amens” among his northern audience as he announces Yahweh’s judgment on these opponents, especially during the climactic oracle against their chief rival of Judah. Each oracle repeats the same phrases:
Thus has Yahweh said:
For three transgressions of …, and for four I will not revoke it [i.e., a verdict of punishment],
because they ….
So I will send fire on …
These oracles give us insight into the relative standards that Yahweh applies to outsider groups and to the insider groups of Judah and Israel. To what extent is each accountable to God? Judah’s “transgressions” are defined as their rejection of “Yahweh’s law” and “statutes,” which Yahweh had specially disclosed to them (Amos 2:4). The other nations, however, are indicted for general acts of inhumanity: military cruelty (e.g., “they ripped open pregnant women,” Amos 1:13), faithlessness to a treaty/covenant relationship—possibly including slave trade (Amos 1:9, 11), and abuses of power. Some of these acts were perpetrated against Israel, though not all: Moab “burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom” (Amos 2:1).
But once Amos says, “for three transgressions of Israel,” one can imagine the shock and hush of his Israelite audience. Their “Amens” to the previous judgment oracles have set the stage for their own condemnation.
STUDENTS MAY SKIM FROM HERE TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE
The Traditions of Amos and His Audience. By what standards does Yahweh judge northern Israel? What were his expectations of his people? What traditions does Amos employ, and what traditions are evidently known to his audience?
Amos's appeals for justice echo, but do not quote, traditions also found in the Sinai Covenant Code (Exod 21-23).
What is the official religion at Bethel and the other named sanctuaries of the north? And how does Amos utilize these traditions to persuade the Israelites that they must change their ways?
To our surprise, while Judah has “Yahweh’s law” and “statutes” (Amos 2:4), the book of Amos contains no appeals to written torah/instruction for northern Israel. Although Amos’s oracles may use phrases and refer to events and locations that are also mentioned in the Pentateuch, there are no clear indications that he is citing or referring to written texts or scriptures. Pentateuchal laws and narratives nowhere form the basis of his indictments. The book of Deuteronomy is clear that there should be only one legitimate sanctuary among God’s people (Deut 12:5, 11, 13–14) and the Deuteronomistic historian regards Jeroboam’s sanctuaries of Bethel and Dan as “a sin” (1 Kgs 12:30). Yet Amos nowhere advocates for the Deuteronomic centralization of worship.
To ascertain how traditions surface in the book of Amos we shall begin with the clearer echoes of shared traditions, first in the “oracle against the nation” addressed to Israel (Amos 2:6–19).
Info Box: Citation or Echo of the Covenant Code?
Amos’s oracle against Israel uses phrases also found in the Sinai Covenant Code (Exod 20:22–23:33). The phrase “garments seized in pledge” (Amos 2:8) echoes one of its laws:
If indeed you seize your neighbor’s garment in pledge, at sundown you shall return it to him, for it is his only covering, it is his garment for his body; in what else shall he sleep? (Exod 22:26–27)
But we must be careful to observe that this is simply an echo, not a citation. The prophet does not use the Covenant Code to indict the Israelites, as he makes no explicit mention of loans or the return of garments at nightfall. He simply uses this image to illustrate a more scandalous sin of using these garments as bedding for illicit sexual activity right beside the altar. Hence, it is not even clear whether Amos is referring to a written text such as the Covenant Code or simply to laws that were customarily known in wider society.
What is surprising is that Amos makes no reference to the preceding law in the Covenant Code, which explicitly prohibits oppression and mistreatment of sojourners, widows, and orphans (Exod 22:21–24). Indeed, in this oracle (Amos 2:6–7) and throughout the book, Amos advocates for the needy, the poor, and the afflicted above all else. One would imagine that an explicit appeal to covenant legislation could add considerable authority to his oracle, but he does not do so.
Other phrases in this oracle may echo another law in the Covenant Code:
“Selling the righteous … and the needy” and “turning aside the way of the humble” (Amos 2:6–7)
“You shall not turn aside the justice of your needy in his lawsuit…. The innocent and the righteous you shall not kill” (Exod 23:6–7).
But again this is not a citation; otherwise we should expect Amos to say, “turning aside the justice of the needy.”
In a later oracle Amos uses similar phrasing that echoes this same passage in the Covenant Code:
“you who distress the righteous, who take a bribe [kōp̄er], and who turn aside the needy in the gate” (Amos 5:12)
“You shall not turn aside the justice of your needy in his lawsuit…. The innocent and the righteous you shall not kill …. And a bribe [šōḥad] you shall not take ” (Exod 23:6–8).
This is not a quotation: each passage uses a different Hebrew word for “bribe” and a different prepositional phrase, “in the gate” versus “in his lawsuit.”
Exodus, Wilderness, and Conquest. The most prominent tradition in the book of Amos is that of the exodus from Egypt, along with some references to the wilderness and the conquest. Amos juxtaposes Israel’s religious and social abuses (Amos 2:6–8) with Yahweh’s escort out from Egypt and through the wilderness and especially with his destruction of the Amorite (Amos 2:9–10). Emphasis is given to Yahweh’s power to “destroy” the Amorites who were “rooted” in the land. Yahweh’s impending judgment on Israel (“Behold, I am about to …”) will be to disable Israel’s champion warriors (Amos 2:13–16). Amos does not go in the direction we might expect. He highlights Yahweh’s power to destroy and disable mighty warriors, not his social liberation from slavery and injustice in the exodus, which would demonstrate the Israelites’ presumptuous role reversal of “selling” their own people.
Info Box: “The land of the Amorite”
Another curiosity is Amos’s source of this conquest tradition. Yahweh had led his people “to possess the land of the Amorite” (Amos 2:10). Throughout the book of Exodus the Amorites are always listed among the six “–ites” residing in the promised land, where Canaanites are usually listed first (Exod 3:8; 23:23; 34:11, etc.). The same applies in the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 7:1; 20:17), unless the term refers just to the Amorites who reside in Transjordan to the east (esp. Sihon the king of the Amorites, Deut 1:4; 3:2, etc.). The only other passages that identify the Amorites as the sole residents of Canaan are Genesis 15:16 (in contrast to Gen 15: 18–20, which immediately follows), Joshua 24:8, 15, 18 (in contrast to the intervening verses in Josh 24:11, 12) and Judges 6:10.
In two other important oracles Amos alludes to the exodus, but he reverses the popular understanding of that tradition.
Hear this word that Yahweh has spoken against you, O people of Israel, against the whole family that I brought up out of the land of Egypt:
Only you have I known
of all the families of the earth;
therefore I will call you to account
for all your iniquities (Amos 3:1–2).
Yahweh indeed affirms his special relationship with the family of Israel (“you only have I known”). While the official and popular religion of northern Israel would assume “election” entails special favors, in Amos’s prophecy it entails special accountability. The phrase “all the families of the earth” may also echo the election tradition of the ancestral promises (Gen 12:2; 28:14).
An even more radical reversal occurs in a later passage:
Are you not like the Ethiopians to me,
O people of Israel? says the Lord.
Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt,
and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?
The eyes of the Lord God are upon the sinful kingdom,
and I will destroy it from the face of the earth
—except that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob,
says the Lord (Amos 9:7–8, NRSV).
Yahweh affirms that he did “bring up Israel from the land of Egypt,” but he now disclaims that it was anything special among the other migrations that he caused!
Info Box 17.3: Illustrative and Subtle Echoes of Pentateuchal Traditions
Elsewhere the book of Amos contains expressions or place names that echo pentateuchal traditions, but they appear simply to illustrate Yahweh’s actions. They do not form the basis or standard by which Yahweh is judging his people. Amos 4:6–11 lists a series of five past judgments that Yahweh had sent upon Israel that end with the refrain, “but you did not return to me.” Two of these judgments are likened to judgments in the Pentateuch:
I sent among you a pestilence after the manner of Egypt …
I overthrew some of you, as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah … (Amos 4:10–11).
Other echoes are more subtle. Yahweh threatens to bring lamentation among the urban and rural populations, “because I will pass through [‘br] in your midst” (Amos 5:17), just as Yahweh had passed through Egypt on the night of the Passover when he struck their firstborn (Exod 12:12, 23). During two of Amos’s visions, Yahweh threatens, “I will never again pass by [‘br] them” (Amos 7:8; 8:2), in effect denying Israel any future theophanic appearances—the kind that he had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exod 33:19, 22; 34:6).
Sacrifices in the wilderness? In a prose oracle Yahweh asks his people a rhetorical question, expecting the answer “no”: “Did you bring to me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness those forty years, O house of Israel?” (Amos 5:25). This understanding appears to be at variance with the priestly traditions of the Pentateuch (i.e., P), especially the book of Leviticus and Leviticus 9:8–24 in particular. On the other hand, the prophet Jeremiah appears to be on the same page as Amos:
For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them, “Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you.” (Jer 7:21–23, NRSV)
(The understanding that ritual sacrifice was not commanded or practiced during the wilderness period is consistent with the JE traditions of the Pentateuch, where sacrifices were offered during the original Passover in Egypt [Exod 12:21–27] and at Mount Sinai [Exod 3:12; 17:15; 24:4–8; 32:5–6], but not in the wilderness.)
Sanctuaries of Bethel and Gilgal. What traditions legitimated Bethel as a sanctuary for Yahweh? Bethel’s priest, Amaziah, asserted, “it is a royal sanctuary and a house of the kingdom” (Amos 7:13), which likely refers to the institution of the sanctuary by Jeroboam I a century and a half earlier (1 Kgs 12:26–33). The association of “the house of Jacob” with “the altar(s) of Bethel” (Amos 3:13–14) may echo the theophanies that the patriarch Jacob experienced at Bethel and commemorated by erecting a sacred “standing stone” (Gen 28:10–22; 35:1–15) and an altar (Gen 35:1, 3, 7). If so, the point of Amos’s allusion to this story would be to illustrate Yahweh’s reversal by cutting off the horns of its altar. On the other hand, the expression, “the house of Jacob,” may simply be another expression for the kingdom of Israel, as it is in Amos 9:8. “Israel’s transgressions” in this passage (Amos 3:14) clearly belong to those of the kingdom, not to the patriarch Jacob/Israel.
Bethel and Gilgal are mentioned together elsewhere (Amos 4:4–5; 5:4–6), but they are not connected to their stories and sacred markers in Genesis or in Joshua (Josh 4:19–24; 5:9–10). Instead, the prophet employs Hebrew word plays (e.g., “Gilgal will indeed go into exile [galoh yigleh]”). Other sacred spaces are mentioned in Amos 8:14: “the Asherah of Samaria,” “your God” of “Dan,” and “the way/beloved of Beersheba.
Info Box: Other Traditions
The singling out of “the new moon” and “the Sabbath” (Amos 8:5) as prominent holidays for ritual observance occurs especially among the eighth-century prophets (Isa 1:13; Hos 2:11; cf. 2 Kgs 4:23; Isa 66:23), but not among the pentateuchal traditions. The new moon as a feast day for the people is also mentioned during the life of David (1 Sam 20:5, 18, 24, 27, 34) and in Psalm 81:3.
Amos also alludes to the Nazirite vow (Amos 2:11–12; Num 6:1–21). And he mentions David’s skills with musical instruments for the sake of illustration (“like,” Amos 6:5; 1 Sam 16:16–18, 23; 18:10; 19:9).
Amos invokes a curse, which is also found among the Deuteronomic curses:
“Houses of human stones you have built, but you shall not dwell in them;
pleasant Vineyards you have planted, but you shall not drink their wine” (Amos 5:11).
“A house you shall build, but you shall not dwell in it.
A vineyard you shall plant, but you shall not make common use of it” (Deut 28:30).
“Vineyards you shall plant and work, but wine you shall not drink …” (Deut 28:39).
It is not clear, however, whether he is pointing specifically to these curses written in “the Book of the Law” or simply invoking common curse formulas.
“The day of Yahweh” (Amos 5:18–20).
Alas for you who desire the day of the Lord!
Why do you want the day of the Lord?
It is darkness, not light;
as if someone fled from a lion,
and was met by a bear;
or went into the house and rested a hand against the wall,
and was bitten by a snake.
Is not the day of the Lord darkness, not light,
and gloom with no brightness in it? (Amos 5:18–20, NRSV)
The tradition underlying the phrase, “the day of Yahweh,” has been debated among scholars. Amos clearly did not coin the expression, as this oracle indicates it was popular expectation of the people. But again he reverses the expectation: it will be “darkness, not light.” The wider context of the chapter places this tradition alongside the worship services at local sanctuaries, such as Bethel and Gilgal (Amos 5:4–6, 14–15, noting the repetition of the command to “seek”), where they held their feasts and performed ritual sacrifice (Amos 5:21–27). The expectation of “light” and “brightness” suggest a theophany/appearance of Yahweh on behalf of his people (“he has dawned … he has shone forth,” Deut 33:2), especially to judge their enemies (Pss 18:12; 80:1; 94:1). Similarly, in the doxology found in the same chapter, Yahweh “darkens the day into night” (Amos 5:8).
God of the Skies. In one of Amos’s best-known passages he strangely likens justice to rolling waters:
“But let justice roll like waters,
and righteousness like a perennial stream” (Amos 5:24).
This exhortation is in direct contrast to his previous indictment against “those who turn justice to bitter wormwood, and righteousness they cast to the earth” (Amos 5:7). Interrupting, so to speak, Amos’s indictments against the people is the second of his three doxologies. (Scholars have debated whether or not these doxologies were later insertions, though more recent scholars affirm their authenticity.) The effect is to contrast the Israelites “who turn [hp̄ḵ] justice to bitter wormwood” with Yahweh “who turns [hp̄ḵ] the shadow of death to morning”:
The one who made the Pleiades and Orion,
and turns deep darkness into the morning,
and darkens the day into night,
who calls for the waters of the sea,
and pours them out on the surface of the earth,
the Lord is his name,
who makes destruction flash out against the strong,
so that destruction comes upon the fortress (Amos 5:8–9, NRSV).
So, Yahweh can bring either destruction or life-giving waters. As the God of the Skies pours out life-giving waters, so his people are to “roll out” justice and righteousness like waters. (Cf. Amos 5:24 also with Ps 104:10.)
Yahweh’s admonition to let righteousness roll “like a perennial stream” (Amos 5:24) echoes Yahweh’s provision of “streams” for creation’s benefit in the biblical psalms, which were the liturgical texts for public worship (Pss 74:15; 104:10).
The other two doxologies in Amos likewise echo the celebration of the God of the skies found in the Psalms (cf. Amos 4:13 and Ps 65:5–8; Amos 9:5–6 and Ps 104:3, 5, 13, 32). Central to each of the three doxologies is the refrain, "Yahweh is his name," thus underscoring that the identity of the God of the skies is Yahweh, and no other. (Cf. also the theophanies of judgment that open their respective books: Amos 1:2 and Micah 1:2–4.) The rationale for these connections is best illustrated in Psalms 50 and 97, where the God of the skies/heavens vanquishes chaotic forces (Pss 50:1–6; 97:1–6), thus “proclaiming his righteousness” (Pss 50:6; 97:6). This drama thus publishes Yahweh's attribute of "putting things right." He establishes right-order in nature and in turn expects it in human society.
To our surprise, Amos’s understanding of “righteousness” and “justice” stems more from the tradition of the God of the skies known from the Psalms, than from Mosaic Torah.
RESUME READING AS NORMAL ON THE NEXT PAGE