James Interprets Amos 9:11-12 (Acts 15:13-18)

May 10, 2013

The previous post explored the meaning of the only fundamentally positive text in Amos–its ending, Amos 9:11-15. The text of Amos envisions a future time when Yahweh would rebuild the “tent of David” with the result that Israel would “possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called” by Yahweh’s “name.” This would involve permanently replanting Israel in the land God gave them and blessing them with prosperity.

At least four significant questions emerge from Amos 9:11-15. First, what is the “tent of David”? Second, what is the meaning of “possess” (militaristic or inheritance) in relation to the nations? Third, what is the meaning of the land promise? Fourth, when did or will this happen?

One might imagine that this was fulfilled when Judah returned from exile. But Amos seems to include Israel in this promise (rather than just Judah), and the post-exilic community never experienced the prosperity or the security that Amos envisioned. This is one reason Second Temple Judaism sometimes thought of themselves as still in exile.

In Acts 15:13-18 elder James applies Amos 9:11-12 to the situation of the early Christian community. Is his application a fulfillment? Does Amos 9:11-15 find its terminus in the reality of the Christian movement in Jerusalem? This is where I want to focus this post.

If one compares Acts 15:116-18 with Amos 9:11-12 several significant differences are apparent (highlighted in italics).

Amos 9:11-12

Acts 15:16-17

In that day After this
I will return
I will raise up and I will rebuild
the tent of David the tent of David
that is fallen that has fallen
and repair its breaches
and raise up its ruins I will rebuild its ruins
and rebuild it and I will restore it
as in the days of old
That they may possess the remnant of Edom That the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord
and all the nations who are called by my name and all the Gentiles who are called by my name
declares the Lord says the Lord
who does this who makes these things
known from of old

While there are several differences between the Hebrew text of Amos and James’s citation (which is primarily from the Septuagint), the most significant is found in Acts 15:17.  Whereas Amos announces that “they may possess the remnant of Edom,” the LXX reads “the remnant of humanity may seek the Lord.” Whereas one understanding of Amos is that Israel will possess the land of Edom, James announces that the remnant of humanity will seek the Lord. While Amos may intend the possession of the land of Palestine (including Edom and other nations contiguous with it), James connects the text with the inclusion of the Gentiles in the Christian community.

What happened? How does one move from the Hebrew text of Amos 9 to this Christian text in Acts 15? This is an instructive question as it illuminates the hermeneutical method of the early church as well as early Judaism (see W. Edward Glenny, BBR [2012] 1-26).

At one level, it is possible that James is not simply thinking about Amos though this is the substance of his quotation. James endorses Peter’s testimony about Cornelius as God’s gracious “visitation” upon the Gentiles so as to include them among the people of God. The “words of the prophets,” James says, “agree” with this (Acts 15:15). The quotation is not an exact reproduction of the LXX as we know it (neither is it an exact quotation of the Hebrew Amos 9:11-12). Rather, James–as Luke records it–may conflate several prophets in order to focus his point.

Glenny suggests that Acts 15:16-18 evidence the influence of other prophet texts, including:

  • “After this” is from Hosea 3:5 with a reference to Israel’s return to Yahweh and the Davidic king
  • “I will return” is from Zechariah 8:3 or Jeremiah 12:15 in which context the nations will learn the ways of God.
  • “will seek” may reflect Zechariah 8:22-23 where nations seek Yahweh in Jerusalem
  • Zechariah 2:14-17 lies in the background with the emphasis on the “nations” who become the people of God.
  • “makes these things” may come from Isaiah 45:21 which also alludes to the inclusion of the nations.

These connections reveal that Luke’s summary of James’s speech reflects a wide-ranging interpretation of the prophets regarding the nations–using a word connections that was part of Jewish hermeneutics of the time (called gezerah shavah).  The point (and the quotation) is not solely dependent upon Amos 9. James argues that the Scriptures–the prophets–agree with the witness of Paul, Barnabas, and Peter.

Theologically, experience is insufficient for the early Christian community. Rather, James argues that the prophets agree with said experience and thus confirms its truth of the experience. Scripture must “agree” with the experience of the church if she is to pursue God’s mission instead of our imagination.

At another level, the LXX version of Amos 9 is reflected in the text of Acts 15 which is rather different from standard English translations of Amos. How does the LXX get “remnant of humanity” from “remnant of Edom” as well as changing “possess” to “seek”? In both cases it may be a simple revocalization of the Hebrew text, that is, supplying different vowels to the Hebrew consonants. Edom is close to Adam, for example. Further, Edom may function as a metaphor for hostile nations that are now included among the people of God. “Possess” has the similar consonants as “seek.” The Greek translators, for whatever reason (perhaps a different Hebrew reading or a deliberate hermeneutical strategy like what is evidenced at Qumran; cf. Richard Bauckham, “Jews and Gentiles [Acts 15:13-21]” in History, Literature and Society in the Book of Acts), substitute “seek” for “possess.”  Whatever the case the LXX makes clear that some Jewish readers of Amos understood the text to mean the inclusion of the Gentiles rather than a “possession” (militaristic) of the nations. Even the original reading of “possess” may have included a sense of inclusion as evidenced that the nations would be called by the name of Yahweh. Either way, James’s point stands: the inclusion of the Gentiles is something with which “the prophets agree”.

How, then, does James (within the context of Luke-Acts) understand the “tent of David”? He appears to understand it as already restored and rebuilt in the context of the inclusion of the Gentiles. So, what is the “tent of David”?

Many interpreters link it to the Davidic kingdom or dynasty, specifically in the exalted reign of the resurrected Lord Jesus. Whatever the “tent of David” is it is effected before the inclusion of the Gentiles. God rebuilds the “tent” with the result or for the purpose of including the nations. In other words, God renews the Davidic dynasty in the reign of Jesus the Messiah who inaugurates the Gentile mission in order to include them among the people of God (Israel). The prominence of “David” in the sermons in Acts is an important clue (cf. Acts 2:24-36; 13:22-23, 34-35) to this meaning. In those “sermons” Peter and then Paul directly connect the promise of David with the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus as the promised Davidic king.

But does this do justice to the “tent of David”? Elsewhere in Acts, the term “tent” refers to worship sanctuaries such as the temple or tabernacle (cf. Acts 7:43, 44, 46). The term is consistently used of the tabernacle in the LXX.  Does James use this language in order to recall the temple or sanctuary? Perhaps we might best understand this, with G. K. Beale does (The Temple and the Church’s Mission), as the resurrected Messiah has erected a new temple (sanctuary). In some ways this may be identified with the church, but in other ways it may anticipate the eschatological temple of God which is the heavenly temple which descends as the new Jerusalem upon the new heaven and new earth.

In one sense, James identifies Amos 9 with the inclusion of the Gentiles and thus the reality of the rebuilt “tent of David.” A new temple has been built and/or the Davidic dynasty has been restored. So, is this the fulfillment of Amos 9:11-15? Or, does Amos 9:11-12 simply “agree ” (in harmony with) with the development or progress of redemption? Does Amos 9:11-15 find its terminus in  the establishment of the church (Jew & Gentile) through the reign of exalted Lord? And what of the land promise?

I think we will need yet another post to address those last questions.


Amos 7:7-17 — Exile is Coming

April 11, 2013

In the first two visions (locusts and fire, 7:1-6) Amos interceded and Yahweh relented: “This will not happen.” Then Yahweh shows Amos a third vision (Amos 7:7-9). This time Amos does not intercede (as far as the text reveals) and Yahweh is resolute in judgment. Yahweh will destroy the idolatrous sanctuaries of Israel and put the sword to the house (dynasty) of Jeroboam II.

Amos sees Yahweh measuring a wall with a plumb line. This is a tool that measures how straight a wall has been built. It is a line to which a weight is attached. As the weight is lowered to the ground from the top of the wall, one can measure how well-built the wall is. Does it lean? Will it stand?  Is it perpendicular?

In the vision Yahweh is measuring Israel’s justice and righteousnes, their devotion and covenant loyalty, by a standard. Israel is not what it was designed to be. We may assume that the Torah is the standard and righteousness is the desired outcome. Instead of justice, Yaweh finds injustice among the people. The wall is not standing straight and strong. Instead, it is faltering and leaning. The wall was not properly built and Israel was nothing like it was supposed to be.

The effect is that the wall must be torn down as it is unsuitable; Israel does not represent God to the nations but has become like the nations. Consequently, God will no longer bear with their injustices. God has decided to act. In particular, God will destory the north’s religious sanctuaries (high places) and raise the sword of Yahweh against the royal dynasty of Jeroboam II. Nevertheless, even within the divine judgment is the divine acknowledge that Israel yet remains “my people.” The covenant language remains and the covenant is excecuted according to the cursings promised in the covenant (Deuteronomy).

The message is so final and disturbing that Amos’s visionary reports are interrupted (even interpreted) by a dialogue between the priest (Amaziah) of one of these religious sanctuaries (Bethel) and Amos the prophet (7:10-17). It is not so much, actually, an interruption as a comment on the seriousness and determination of Yahweh to carry out the word of Amos. The prophet emphasizes the gravity of the prophetic warning by reporting the dialogue between an idolatrous priest and the Yahwehist prophet. The final word of the prophet reiterates the announced word of Yahweh from the vision (compare 7:9 with 7:17).

The dialogue also alerts us to the opposition Amos faced as a Yahwehist prophet in the northern kingdom. Amaziah reports the message of Amos to king Jeroboam II (Amos 7:10-11) and then forbids Amos–presumably on the authority of the king–to prophesy again (Amos 7:12-13). Amos responds with a prophecy (Amos 7:14-17).

Prophet, priest, and king–all of whom should represent Yahweh before the nations–are found in conflict with each other. The priest attempts to preserve his unique role at Bethel. The king supports, presumably, the priest as it is the “king’s sanctuary” against which Amos prophesies. The prophet reaffirms his message against the sancutary despite its royal and priestly support. Prophet, priest, and king are engaged in a religious contest for the hearts of God’s people.

Amaziah, the priest, appeals to the highest court, that is, to king Jeroboam II. Reporting Amos’s message in terms of the death of Jeroboam II and Israel’s exile in a distant land (removed from their own land of promise), he describes Amos as a political conspirator. Amos intends, according to Amazriah, to overthrow the royal authority and implement a different religious program that would unseat both priest and king.

Amos attacks the religious and political heart of Israel–Bethel. This was the worship center that was situated on the southern border of Israel next to Judah (the southern kingdom). It was a political act as well as a religioius one since the sancturay was an alternative worship site to Jerusalem (which was also a religioius and political center). Bethel’s political function was to unite the northern kingdom religiously and prevent a return to Yahweh at the temple in Jerusalem. Amaziah describes Bethel as the “temple of the kingdom.” To prophesy against Bethel was to prophesy against the religio-political state of Israel. Amaziah saw the threat, reported him, and presumably on the authority of Jeroboam commanded him to cease and desist.

Amos is ordered out of the country and back to Judah. He should pursue his prophetic career (and earn his money [bread]) there; A maziah presumes that Amos is a career prophet seeking monetary gain. He is forbideen to prophesy in Bethel ever again. Amos is neither one of the king’s priests nor the king’s prophets. He is not welcome in Israel.

Amos never wanted to be a prophet. In Judah he was neither a prophet nor training to be a prophet (the probable meaning of “prophet’s son”). He did not go to prophet seminary. Instead, he was a shepherd and a migrant worker. He was not part a royal prophetic tradition in Judah nor was he an urban royal counselor (as other prophets were like Isaiah later). Instead, he was a simple believer who was called to speak a word of prophecy to Israel. We might imagine that he may have even been reluctant to prophesy as others were (e.g., Moses, Jeremiah, Jonah).

In so many words Amos said, “Yahweh told me to prophesy to Israel and that is what I am here to do.”  Like Luther later, he can do nothing else–he must speak the word of the Lord. “Therefore,” Amos says, “I will tell you what Yahweh has said.” Amos must speak; he cannot remain silent.

Amos has a word for Amaziah specifically. His children will “fall by the sword,” he will go into exile with Israel and die in a distant land, and his spouse will (we may presume) join him in exile where she will serve as a prostitute. His familly–his joy and future–will be decimated. His descendants will have no future as even his land is divided and given to others. In essence, Amaziah, as a priest in Israel, represents Israel as a whole. What will happen to him will happen to Israel. His future is Israel’s future as Israel will go into exile. The land grant–one of the great blessings promised to Abraham’s descendents–is rescinded. The hope of Israel evaportes as it has no future without land.

Amos does not back down from his message. He will not stop preaching the message Yahweh gave him.  Royal and priestly opposition do not deter him even though he is but a shepherd from the backwater town of Tekoa.

Amos was a lone voice, it seems, at the Bethel sanctuary. He faced tremendous religious and political pressures. The dominant culture opposed him and yet he steadfastly proclaimed the word of the Lord. Perhaps such is our task as well.

May we ever be so faithful!


Amos 6:1-14: The Second Woe

March 28, 2013

This is the second of two woe oracles in Amos. The first (5:18-20) was followed by a legal indictment (5:21-27). The second (6:1-7) is followed by a judgment pronouncement (6:8-14). Together, as the third major section of Amos, they lament Israel’s sin and warn the nation about impending doom.

The woe oracle in Amos 6 itself falls into three parts: (1) woe to those at ease in Zion and Samaria (1-3), (2) woe to those who live in luxury; and (3) the consequence of exile for their ease and luxury. The “woes” are describing the same group of people, but now includes not only Israel (“Samaria”) but Judah (“Zion”). The “woes” address those who live in ease and security, that is, they sleep on ivory beds, lounge on couches, eat choice meat from their livestock (lamb and veal), sing idle songs, drink wine in bowls rather than cups, anoint themselves with expensive oils, and pay no attention to the injustices within Israel and Israel’s imminent demise. Despite their replescent circumstances the “day of disaster” will come upon them and they will go into “exile.”

It is important to remember the historical setting of the eighth century B.C. The imperial powers early in the century were consumed with their own internal problems which permitted Israel and Judah to rise once again to heights that rivaled Solomon himself. It appears that just as Solomon had controlled Hamath (150 miles north of Dan in modern Syria), extended his influence near the Euphrates (where Calneh [Calno?] was probably located; cf. Isaiah 10:9), and dominated the Philistines located to the southwest of Israel along the coast (including Gath), so Israel and Judah’s influence exerted a similar influence. The early eighth century was a prosperous period. The powerful grew rich and the nation was secure The rise of the Assyrian empire in the mid-eighth century will threaten this “ease” and “security.”

However, these regions are presently or soon to be subject to distress. The Assyrians will conquer these territories as they experience their days of “disaster” and “violence.” Israel is neither “better” nor “greater” than any of these regions though a healthy covenantal relationship would have ensured their greatness and better position. Instead, despite their ease and false sense of security, they, too, like the other regions, will experience the Assyrian onslaught.

This first woe is addressed to both Zion (Judah) and Samaria (Israel), but is particularly directed at their rich and powerful leaders living in the capital cities (Jerusalem and Samaria). Metaphorically, they live high on the heights in their great houses. They are the leaders (notable or distinguished men) to whom Israel “comes” for justice. They occupy the positions of power that discern and execute justice in the land.

The second woe expands on the situation of these leaders. Amos paints a luxurious picture. They soak in the pleasure of their wealth while at the same time neglect the injustice that surrounds them. They revel in their riches and are unmoved by the “ruin of Joseph” (which indicates that Israel is the main target despite the inclusion of Judah in the address).

The description drips with sarcasm. As Niehaus (Minor Prophets, 439) writes, “The privileged classes of Israel were living like kings, and Amos even likens them to a king–David.” They enjoy the leisure, food and comforts that the poor cannot imagine. They flaunt their wealth as they sing “idle songs” (only time this Hebrew word is used in Scripture) and strum their harps. Their lives are frivolous and self-serving. They have no heart for justice but only for their own comforts. They consume and do not share.

“Therefore,” Amos says, “they shall now be the first of those who go into exile.” The leaders (heads) of the nation (6:1) will be at the head of the exilic line. The Assyrians are coming! Exile will extinguish their “revelry.” The party is over. Dancing will turn into mourning.

The judgment pronouncement begins in Amos 6:8 with an three-fold declaration from the mouth of Yahweh:

I abhor the pride of Jacob, and

I hate his strongholds. and

I will deliver up the city.

The word of the Lord begins the judgment announcement followed by the prophet’s comments. The “I’ language is quite strong. The parallel between pride and strongholds reflects the “ease” (pride) and “security” (citadels) Israel felt within the walls of Samaria. God hates the nation’s luxury and its military confidence. The woes against the ease and security reflect God’s abhorrence of their luxury and neglect.

The brief scenario of Amos 6:9-11 underscores how thorough God’s judgment will be. Everyone in the house will die and those who remain will either bury their relatives or cower in fear at the very mention of Yahweh. There is no escape and there is no hiding in the Day of the Lord.

“Behold,” Amos writes. He highlights the reality of the disaster to come. Both great and small houses will tumble–neither the rich nor the poor will escape the judgment to come.

But why will such devastation come upon Israel? Amos provides the rationale in 6:11-14. It is two-fold:  (1) because they perverted justice, and (2) because they boasted in their military capabilities.

Amos uses a metaphor to describe the unexpected (even unnatural) situation in Israel. As the people whom God choose from among the whole earth, Israel’s injustice and unrighteousness was as unnatural to their calling as horses running on or oxen plowing a rocky crag. Everyone would be shocked to see horses running or oxen plowing in such circumstances but yet Israel has no fear of God regarding their injustice and unrighteousness. Israel has poisoned the well of God’s kingdom upon the earth. This is a mockery and it must be judged.

Moreover, Israel takes pride in its military power. It appears that Israel had, in its recent prosperity and expansion under the reign of Jeroboam II, captured Lo-debar (meaning, “no thing/word”) and Karnaim (meaning “pair of horns”). The former was located in Gilead a few miles south of the Sea of Galilee while the latter was located on the plain of Bashan between Damascus and the Sea of Galilee. These towns symbolize Israel’s ability to regain territory. They rejoiced in their victory and boasted in their military accomplishments.

But those who boast in such military feats and take pride in their abilities also poisoned the land with injustice. They rejoiced in their military might but failed to grieve over the ruins of their judicial system.

So, judgment is coming. For the second time the prophet uses the conjunction “because” followed by “Behold.” Pay attention! This is the reason God will raise up an empire to swallow you whole. The declaration of Yahweh in 6:8 is paralleled by the declaration in 6:14. A nation will destroy the source of your pride by taking away your wealth and demolishing your citadels. Assyria will “oppress” you just as you have oppressed the poor in your own nation, and the whole of the nation will be engulfed from Lebo-hamath (northern regions of Israel) to the wadi Arabah (the chasm that separates Moab and Edom on the east side of the Dead Sea). No part of Israel will escape; it will experience divine judgment from north to south.

Luxury, military pride and the neglect of the poor are themes that should ring in the ears of a superpower such as the United States. Do we fare any better than Israel under the scrutiny of Yahweh, the God of hosts?


Amos 5:1-17: Admonition and Lament for Israel

March 14, 2013

This is the third of Amos’s three prophetic speeches against Israel. They each begin with “Hear this word” (3:1; 4:1; 5:1). The first announced God’s coming visit in judgment against Israel. The second highlighted divine patience and persistence in seeking to turn Israel from its sins. The third is a divine admonition and lament for Israel.

Harold Shank (College Press NIV Commentary), adapting a chiastic outline from Waard in Vetus Testamentum (1997) 170-177, suggests this structure for Amos’s oracle:

First Lament (1-3)

First Admonition (4-6)

First Accusation (7)

Hymn (8a)

Yahweh is the Name (8b)

Hymn (9)

Second Accusation (10-13)

Second Admonition (14-15)

Second Lament (16-17)

This chiastic structure climaxes in the announcement of the name of Israel’s God in 5:8b. This the centerpiece of the oracle. “Yahweh is his name!” In effect, this is a doxological battle cry. The language is exactly the same as in Exodus 15:3:  ”Yahweh is a man of war; Yahweh is his name.” This is the God of the Exodus who delivered Israel from Egyptian slavery (cf. Amos 3:1). The Warrior God who fought to deliver Israel now warns Israel about the coming disaster.

Hymns. “Yahweh is his name” is also a doxological praise (cf. Amos 9:6). The exclamation is surrounded by hymnic lines that remind Israel that Yahweh creates both good and evil (disaster; cf. Isaiah 45:7; Amos 9:4). Yahweh made the constellations that appear in the heavens–Pleiades is part of the constellation Taurus and Orion (also known as “the hunter”) is a bright constellation. Both are visible to the naked eye (Job 9:9; 38:31). Yahweh also rules over the morning and night–God turns the darkness into morning and the day into night. God rules over good and evil (chaos), over light and darkness. Yahweh also rules over the chaos of the seas; indeed, Yahweh pours out the water upon the earth. God is sovereign over chaos. With chaos Yahweh destroys the strong, even those fortified behind their seemingly impregnable walls (fortresses). The chaos that will envelope Israel is no coincidence; it is the work of the Creator God who releases the forces of chaos against Israel.

Accusations.  Israel’s problem is “justice” and “righteousness.” Just as God “turns deep darkness into the morning” (5:8), so Israel “turns justice in wormwood” or bitterness (5:7)–the same Hebrew verb is used in both instances. Israel’s core problem is injustice; this is the accusation upon which their destruction turns. But what is the injustice? While the first accusation introduces the idea (5:7), the second accusation articulates the specifics (5:10-13).

The second Hebrew term in Amos 5:10 is the next to last Hebrew term in Amos 5:12–”gate.” Everything Amos notes between those two terms happens at the “gate.” The city gate is the place where the elders and other leaders met to consider issues of justice and adjudicate legal problems (cf. Deuteronomy 21:19; 22:15; 25:7; Job 5:4; 31:21; Psalm 127:5). But justice does not prevail in the gates of Israel. Rather, they

hate whoever reproves them
abhor whoever speaks the truth
trample on the poor
exact portions [taxes?] on grain from the poor
afflict the righteous
turn aside the needy

The above six lines appear in three pairs. The first pair emphasizes the inability of the leaders to hear the truth; they cannot stand to be corrected. They are not interested in the truth but in profit. The second pair specifies a particular way in which the poor are mistreated. The leaders exact “portions” from the poor. In some way, they demand the poor make payments of grain in order to continue in their livelihood. This may be excessive rents on land owned, perhaps previously seized through unjust means, by the wealthy. It may be excessive taxation that hurts the poor. The third pair reminds the reader of Amos 2:7 where the poor are trampled and the afflicted are turned aside (same Hebrew verb as here in 5:12). The same pair of words–righteous and needy–also appear in Amos 2:6 and 8:6. “Needy” is a general synonym for poor (cf. Isaiah 14:30; Jeremiah 29:16). The city leaders are not willing to hear the plight of the poor and give them justice. Instead, they take bribes from the wealthy and dismiss the poor.

These conditions create societal chaos at many levels. One is specifically noted in Amos 5:13.  The prudent (or wise) will remain silent during such chaotic and unpredictable times. When justice does not prevail–when evil reigns–the wise will keep to themselves. It is too dangerous to speak and speaking is ineffective. This is a social consequence of pervasive injustice. This silence is not necessarily sanctioned, but it is acknowledged. This is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

The accusation includes consequences. Though they have built “hewn” stone houses and planted extravagant or desirable vineyards, they will never enjoy them. Their wealth and power enabled them to build houses out of “hewn” stone which assumes skilled labor. Such homes and vineyards were status symbols in ancient Israel. But, ultimately, their injustices will not pay out. Their sins will found them out.

Admonitions.  ”Seek” is the key word in the admonitions. It is used four times in Amos 5:4-6, 14. It is an aggressive term that reflects orientation and direction. What or whom will one seek? The choice is laid out for Israel:  seek Yahweh or seek Bethel (including its complements–Gilgal and Beersheba). The former leads to life, but the latter leads to exile, destruction, and death. The fire of destruction that characterized the consequences described in Amos 1-2 returns in Amos 5:6.

Life, however, is offered. The verb is used three times in Amos 5:4, 6, 14. While the nation has no hope, this does not translate into hopelessness. The Lord may yet be gracious in astounding ways, especially to the “remnant of Joseph.” Even as the Lord passes through Israel and leaves destruction in the wake, God’s grace will overflow to the remnant that seeks God. Amos once again reminds Israel of God’s faithfulness by using language that evokes memories of the Patriarchs. Just as God was present among them, so he will be “with” those who seek him (cf. Genesis 12:4; 17:3; 26:24; 39:3). This is the covenantal promise to which God is faithful.

Seeking Yahweh, however, is not merely avoiding idolatrous worship at Bethel. It is to love good and hate evil (Amos 5:15). Specifically, it is to “establish justice in the gate.” In other words, Israel must practice justice in its courts, uphold the rights of the poor, and serve the needy. One cannot seek Yahweh when they ignore or neglect the needs of the poor. Seeking Yahweh includes practicing social justice.

Laments. Israel will weep and mourn because, Yahweh declares, “I will pass through your midst” (5:17; cf. Amos 8:10). This is ominous language. In Israel’s past history, Yahweh “passed through the land of Egypt” in order to kill Egypt’s firstborn (Exodus 12:12, 23). Now Yahweh will pass through Israel with devastating effect. Every vineyard, farm, street and square (open spaces near the city gate) will be filled with lamentation.

But Amos himself, as the mouthpiece of Yahweh, begins the lament. The speech opens with God’s own lament over Israel. Even though Israel yet exists as a nation, the prophetic lament assumes its fall is a reality. Israel will not rise again as there is no one to help her. 90% of Israel–a metaphorical number–will disappear. Though they send out an army of 1000, only 100 will return. Israel is about to face a slaughter.

Yahweh does not deliver this message with a smile. God is not happy about these circumstances. Nevertheless, the God who loves righteousness must prosecute injustice in the land. God will act; God will set things right. Though patient and longsuffering, God ultimately does what is right.

God’s own lament evidences the divine pain as Yahweh grieves over Israel and, at the same time, Yahweh grieves for the poor and needy who have suffered at the hands of the powerful in Israel.

Amos calls us to grieve with him over both the sins and destruction of the wicked. The prophet calls us to social justice. “Seek good and hate evil” is to “seek” Yahweh.


Amos 4:1-13: “Yet You Did Not Return to Me”

March 4, 2013

This is the second of Amos’s three prophetic speeches against Israel. They each begin with “Hear this word” (3:1; 4:1; 5:1). The first announced God’s coming visit in judgment against Israel while the third will voice lament. The second highlights divine patience and persistence in seeking to turn Israel from its sins.

While this second speech remembers Yahweh’s incessant attempts to hinder Israel’s sins, it also boldly announces that God’s patience has reached a limit. Even as Yahweh, through the prophet Amos, runs through a series of divine acts (4:6-11) intended to produce repentance, Yahweh sarcastically encourages Israel to continue its opulent lifestyle and idolatrous worship (4:1-5). God has had enough. The time for repentance is finished. Judgment is coming (4:12-13).

Yahweh Addresses Israel’s Wealthy Elite (4:1-5).

Amos begins where his last sermon ended–at Bethel and in the summer/winter homes (3:14-15)–but in reverse order. The connection between the end of the previous oracle and the beginning of the present one forms a B-A-A’-B’ structure. Amos moves from Bethel to “winter/summer homes” and then from “Bashan/Samaria” to Bethel. The allusions of 3:14-15 are explicit in 4:1-5.

Wealthy women who live in their winter and summer homes are like “cows of Bashan.” They are well-fed and lounging in luxury where their husbands or servants are pictured as wait on them. It is a life of ease in their “great houses” filled with ivory. But this wealth was acquired through the cruel oppression of the poor and needy. They have much because they have taken from those who have little (cf. Amos 2:7).

Amos mocks their religious observances. Bethel (Jeroboam I’s new worship center where he erected a golden calf) and Gilgal (apparently a worship center at the very place where Israel first camped in Canaan; Joshua 5:9) are places where Israel assembled to worship Yahweh though in idolatrous fashion. They practiced Torah. In fact, they practiced Torah in hyper-fashion.

Animal sacrifices were not required every morning, but they brought them every day. Tithes were only required every three years but they brought some every third day (Deuteronomy 14:28). They even burned leavened bread for their Thanksgiving sacrifices when only unleavened was required (Leviticus 2:11; 7:12-15). They publicly announced their Freewill offerings when that was not required (Leviticus 22:18-25). Whether Israel actually practiced this hyper-”obedience” is immaterial or whether Amos is mocking their devotion, Amos’s description ridicules their motive.

Israel worships Yahweh in this manner only to display their wealth. Yahweh rejects their worship, at least in part, because they gained their wealth by oppressing the poor. Their worship–even hyper-worship–had become a form of rebellion (transgression). They feigned the love of God while at the same time they failed to love their neighbor (poor).

Consequently, the women who now luxuriously recline in their great houses will be taken by fishhooks into captivity through openings in Samaria’s breached wall (4:2-3). Assyrians were known for using hooks in the noses of their captives to lead them into exile (cf. 2 Chronicles 33:11). The metaphor, however, is even more chilling. These women will be dragged out their great houses like fish out of the sea. They will be “cast out into Harmon” (Amos 4:3). Harmon is apparently some distant and unwelcome place, but contemporary scholarship has not been able to identify it. Some, however, think the name is a version of “Hermon” which would then refer to the peak that overlooks the fields of Bashan. It might mean that the women who, metaphorically, grazed Bashan in peace and splendor are now removed to the desolate peak of Hermon.

Yahweh Remembers the Warnings (4:6-11).

Five times Amos repeats the formulaic phrase: “yet you did not return to me, declares the Lord” (Amos 4:6, 8, 9, 10, 11). It is the final two lines in each of the descriptions of God’s interaction with Israel as Yahweh attempted to turn Israel from their sins. But Israel would not return to God.

Yahweh used famine (4:6), drought (4:7-8), crop devastation (4:9), disease and war (4:10), and tragic disasters (4:11) to persuade Israel. Each of these events originated in the will of God. “I gave” (4:6), “I withheld” (4:7), “I struck” (4:9), “I sent” (4:10), and “I overthrew” (4:11) clarify that God is responsible for these “evils” (cf. Amos 3:6).

While Yahweh intended them as warnings, Israel did not heed them. Perhaps they did not even recognize them as such. Israel failed to see the hand of God in these disasters and discern their meaning. The “evils,” however, should have reminded them of God’s past dealings with the nations in their own history. Such disasters should have become occasions for self-evaluation and introspection. Instead, they look elsewhere for their meaning.

Famine, drought, locust, pestilence like in Egypt and disasters like Sodom and Gomorrah are signals for how God has previously engaged nations as their own history recounts. The memories of Egypt and Sodom underscore God’s acts. Israel should have known but failed to listen to the voice of God in these moments.

God acted in Israel, as Yahweh had among the nations at various times, in order to lead them to repentance. The Apocalypse reminds us that God still moves among the nations for similar purposes (cf. Revelation 9:20-21; 16:9-11). Though we are unable to discern without prophetic insight the nature of God’s actions in the world, moments of pain and hurt are always appropriate for prayer, fasting and introspection. Being with God or returning to God are redemptive responses to “evils” in our lives.

Yahweh Announces Judgment (4:12-13).

As if to relieve all doubt, Yahweh announces that this is a divine judgment. “I will do this to you,” says the Lord. The coming disaster is no mere coincidence or freak of nature. It is an act of God.

The time for repentance , however, is now over. When the Lord says “prepare to meet your God, O Israel,” this is no invitation to repentance or even covenant renewal. Rather, as Paul notes in the Hermeneia series (p. 151), this is “a summons to a final battle.” Every previous attempt by Yahweh to turn Israel and renew the covenant with them was ineffective. This final encounter is not redemptive but punitive. When Israel meets God in this moment there will be no parley, no truce, and no delay. Judgment is imminent.

The successive uses of the “declares Yahweh” followed by the summons to meet God issues in a doxology (Amos 4:13).  The praise articulates the majesty and power of God. Yahweh is the Creator who formed the mountains and the winds. Yahweh is the most high God who walks upon the hills. Yahweh created them and reigns upon them.

The concluding reference to the one who “treads upon the hills” is a metaphor for a conquering king. God moves along the ridge line of the greatest heights and  watches the battle. The Creator God has summoned Israel to battle and God will see it to its final end. The God who created the mountains will turn morning into darkness for the nation of Israel. [Some translations read the dawn breaks the darkness.

Yahweh did not hide this from Israel. Over and over again, Yahweh warned Israel about her fate. But she did not listen. Now the prophet, speaking for Yahweh, announces what Yahweh intends to do.

The Creator God who formed Israel, her covenant God Yahweh, will now destroy her.

Her destruction is a warning to Judah…and to us.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 938 other followers

%d bloggers like this: