una nueva visión de amós 4,1-3

7/27/2019 una nueva visión de Amós 4,1-3

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/una-nueva-vision-de-amos-41-3 1/16

VêtusTestamentum

Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 brill.nl/vt

A Fresh Look at Amos 4:1-3 and Its Imagery

Emmanuel O. Nwaoru

Catholic Institute of West Africa, Port Harcourt

Abstract

For a couple of decades, if not centuries, the textual, syntactical, and semantic problems of

Amos 4:1-3 have so engaged the attention of commentators to the detriment of a straightfor

ward interpretation of the oracle. This article sets out to examine afresh some of those thorny

literary issues. Its findings show that the apparent illogical grammar and imagery of the oracle

serve prophetic needs. For it is on such a figurative language that the prophet sets the polarity

between YHWH s indictment and judgment of the upper rich class of Israelite society and,

consequendy, his message.

Keywords

Amos, metaphor, oppression, judgment

The overall message of the oracle of Amos 4:1-3 in its tripartite structure isrelatively clear. It has to do with accusations (v. 1), threat (v. 2), and punishment (v. 3) for social injustice. The interpretation of the text, on the other

hand, has not been as easily graspable. For a couple of decades or even centuries it has defiled any straightforward interpretation because of its textual,syntactical and semantic difficulties. Nonetheless, the oracle recaps the issueswhich led to the indictment of Israel among the nations (Amos 2:6-8) andfinds its way to the central position among the three summonses of YHWH,in Amos characterized by the formula ΐ\)Τ\ *VH^ IPDUJ "hear this word

(3:1; 4:1; 5:1). Another important aspect of the uniqueness of the text lies in

the prophet s avoiding a direct naming of his addressees (the culprits of the

social crimes) contrary to what one finds in 2:6—Israel, 3:1—people of

Israel, and 5:1—house of Israel. Rather, Amos depicts them in animal meta

phor as ΙψΙΠ ΠΠ3 "the cows of Bashan" who are in Mount Samaria The

BRILL

http://brill.nl/vt

http://brill.nl/vt



E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 461

The text is properly delimited in its immediate context by the theme of

oppression and its peculiar threat and punishment, which is sealed by theoracular formula, Π1ΓΡ "DRÏ, "says the Lord" (v. 3). Moreover, emphasis shifts

in verse 4 to new localities (Bethel and Gilgal) and themes, multiplication of

transgression and cult (w. 4-5), thus signalling the beginning of a new oracle.

This essay will look afresh at the text of Amos 4:1-3 in some of its peculiar

textual and literary features, bearing in mind that these features have concrete

meaning for the hearers/ readers in their proper contexts.

Amos 4:1-3 in Its Historical Context

The first half of the 8th century was an era of relative peace in the northern

kingdom. Since there was no threat from within or without, it gave rise to

national ascendancy. A summary account of Jeroboams success in 2 Kgs 14:15

is a veritable synthesis. He "restored the borders of Israel from the entrance of

Hamath in the north to the sea of the Arabah." According to Merrill, it was a

period comparable only to that of Solomon (1 Kgs 4:20-25; 2 Chr. 9:2o).1

Similarly, it was not only an era of unusual material and physical prosperity

for the privileged few in Israelite society,2 but also of general moral, religious

and spiritual decay. The imagery of Amos 4:1 indicates that the good fortune

of Samaria went hand in hand with this decay, especially as seen in the

wanton fraudulent accumulation of wealth by the rich at the expense of

the poor.3

The verbs pO)V and γίΠ used in this verse reflect a context of social oppres

sion and exploitation of the poor.4

The ruling class, which were supposedly

the guarantor of social justice and promoter of human dignity, abused their

power and exploited the socially weak. The despoliation is intensified by the

insatiable desire of certain women in society who attached themselves to the

rulers to satisfy their appetite for luxury. Those women, like their lords from

whom they make incessant demands, would have the needy poor crushed to

1)E. H. Merrill, "Jeroboam", in W. A. Van Gemeren, et al. (eds.), New International Dictionary

of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDDOTTE) 4 (Carlisle, 1997), p. 771; also Kingdom

of Priests (1987), pp. 374-375.2)

Cf. R. B. Coote, Amos Among the Prophets: Composition and Theohgy (Philadelphia, 1981),

pp 24 32; also Hos 8:14; 10:1; 12:7 8; 13:15; Amos 3:12 15; 4:1; 5:11; 6:1 4 6



46 2 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

acquire wealth and make themselves chic and sleek. This attitude of the men

and women of Samaria is comparable with what goes on today in many statecapitals of the world, especially the African states.5 The context of this oracle

makes it easily comprehensible, particularly among the developing nations. It

is also against the background of the charges made against these groups in

Israelite society that the figurative language of the oracle would be meaning

fully interpreted.

Some Critical Problems in the TextThe problems with the text of Amos 4:1-3 as we have already remarked are

textual, syntactical and semantical. There is apparent confusion in the lan

guage which has generated a lot of discussions, most of which have taken the

oracle far beyond the pericope of the original hearers. However, one must

admit that the prophet apparently defies almost every rule of grammar. We

shall now examine some of the problems in detail.

Looking at some of the textual critical issues, verse 2 comes readily in

mind. Here the Septuagint (LXX) omits MT s *ÍTK. In fact, its inconsistencyin rendering Π1ΓΓ TTN in Amos is suggestive. Out of the 20 occurrences of

the phrase in Amos, the LXX omits *ΤΤΝ in nine occasions (1:8; 6:8; 7:1,

4 (2x), 6; 8:1, 3, 11). Based on the frequency of this expression in the pro

phetic literature, some of the references in the MT could be regarded as

intrusive cliché. Its occurrence here could be a typical example. However, the

use of the cliché in prophetic corpus is not without purpose. "ΤΤΚ like •»rfrtf is

a term which expresses the prophet s feeling of rapport and intimacy with

YHWH, the God whom he serves.6 By ignoring the term the LXX fails to bring out this sense of affinity,

7in spite of the glossy position it accorded the

term at the end of v. 3.

5)Some home videos have brought this to light. For instance, it is said of one of the leading

female characters, "Lady B" in the movie "Sharon Stone in Abuja" (Louis Merchandise Ltd),

"You have all the connections" and "Nobody just goes to the Big Boys except through you." In

fact, this top Lady uses young girls as collateral for the senators. In "Abuja Connection" (OJ

Productions) young ladies are enjoined to "break the rank of men and take over from them."

Other home-video movies of the Nigeria Nollywood describe similar situations.β

See Hos. 9:8, 17; Isa. 7:13; Mie. 7:7; also Jer. 31:6; Ps. 31:15; 2 Chr. 18:13; also Mk. 15:34;



E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 46 3

Perhaps the most difficult textual problems of the oracle are found in verse

3. In v. 3a, the LXX changed exclusively MT D ^ ? , "breaches (in the wall)",to an adjective γυμναί (ΠίΕΠΙϊ), "naked". Graphic confusion could hardly

explain this change except that the LXX was already imagining the fate of

"the cows of Bashan" in the hands of the agents who would execute YHWH s

judgment in fulfilment of his oath (v. 2a). This is corroborated by its reading

the two MT active8 verbs î"tf N&F1 (v. 3a) and Π̂ ΓΟ̂ ψΠ (v. 3b) as passive. Thus

we have: καί έξενεχθήσεσθε γυμναί... και άπορριφήσεσθε, "And you shall be

brought out naked.. .and you shall be cast out9 "

According to the LXX the destination of the exiled "cows of Bashan" is το

όρος το Ρεμμαν, "mount Remman", as distinct from MT s ΓφΟΊΠΠ. This

reading may have resulted from a wrong division of the letters of the Hebrew

ΓφΟΊΠΠ into two words, ΊΪ}Γ\ and ρΟΊ (the mountain Rimmon)10 and the

doubling of Ί. Similarly, some commentators have suggested a slight emenda

tion of the Hebrew ΠΛΟΊΠΠ either to Π^ΟΊΠ, "towards Hermon",11 orτ : - - τ : ν '

ΓΰζΠΟΠ* " t 0 t n e refuse heap",12 as alternative reading. Other versions like

Aquila and Western LXX read όρος ερμωνα, "mount Ermona," while Symm,

Peshitta and the Tg identified the location as 'Αρμενία "Armenia," and the Vg as Armon. A few authors like Andersen and Freedman have preferred to

remain closest to the MT ΓφΟΊΠΠ by identifying it with "Harmon," which

according to them is a "region beyond Damascus in Aram".13 But this is only

a conjecture since it is not certain whether or not it is a geographical loca

tion. In fact, some of the variant readings point to the contrary and thus

bring out the enigmatic nature of the MT ΓφΟΊΠΠ. All we can say is that the

uncertainty about this word agrees with Amos' style of not disclosing fully

8) MT has them as qalzxia hiphil respectively.9) The reading of άπορίπτω as passive is also followed by Symmachus and the Vulgate.

10) Cf. J. A. Sanders, "Harmon", in G. A. Buttrick, et al. (eds.), The Interpreters Dictionary of

the Bible (IDB) 2 (Nashville, 1962), p. 525. S. M. Paul translates the phrase as "the mountain

Remman". Cf. Amos (OTL; Minneapolis, 1991), p. 136.H ) H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, 1977), p. 204. Based on his accept

ing emendation to Mt. Hermon, E. H. Dyck presumes like many commentators that the direc

tion from where the enemies would strike was the north. See "Harmon", in D. N. Freedman,

et al. (eds.), TheAnchor Bible Dictionary (ABD) 3 (New York, 1992), p. 61.12) W R. Harper, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Amos and Hosea (ICC; Edinburgh,

1905), p. 85; K. J. Cathcart, R. P. Gordon, The Targum of the Minor Prophets (The Aramaic



4 6 4 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

the final destination of those cast out in the context of punishment.14 This iswhy we read the MT as directional, "towards Harmon"; and since Harmon isyet unidentified, towards an unknown destination.

As for the grammatical confusion the stage is set right in the opening verseof the oracle as \Φ2Τ\ ΠΠ3 (fem. pi.), the vehicle of the leading metaphor. It

fails to agree in gender with the imperative ΙΡΟψ (mase, pi.), which actually

addresses it. There is also lack of proper distinction in the application of gen

der form of the pronominal suffixes supposedly referring to it. Out of the

four plural pronominal suffixes, only one, φΓΡΊΠΝ (v. 2b) agrees in gender with

the addressees. The rest—ΟΓΡΠΝ (v. 1), DD^y (v. 2a) and DDH« (v. 2b)—are

masculine plural in form. The most disturbing is the discord between the two

suffixes in v. 2b, which likely refer to the same subject. The cause of the discord

has been attributed to the fact that Hebrew masculine gender serves as "com

mon gender, when the group referred to consists of both males and females".15

Although the syntactical relationship between Ιψ3Π ΓΠΊ3 and the three key

participles in v. 1 is different, because they agree in gender and form, the

mixture of feminine participial forms with masculine suffix in the same verse

leaves the actual subjects ironically undefined. The Targum gives credence to

this when it replaces the vehicle of the metaphor Π1Ί3 in the MT with thephrase "you who are rich in possessions".16 The "you" is interpretive, imply-

ing that both male and female are subject to the summons at the beginning

of the oracle. Consequently, the mixed forms may serve as an indicator to

joint responsibility of male and female. K. Elliger, on the contrary, adopts a

different approach altogether; he preserves in the BHS the earlier suggestion

of Kittel to have all the suffixes rendered in the feminine, thus harmonizing

the divergent forms. The fact that the three participles share the same forms

in gender and number with ΤΫΠΒ does not necessarily imply in figurative language that they refer to a single group of people. It is rather more likely that

the feminine form of the participles is designed to make it agree with the

form of the vehicle of the principal metaphor.

Lack of proper distinction of gender of the suffixes17

as well as giving the

first position to masculine verb could be more of practices that passed on

14) Cf. Amos 5:27; also Paul, Amos, p. 136 n. 96.15)

This is unlike the feminine gender that refers specifically and exclusively to females. See Andersen and Freedman, Amos, p. 421.

16) Cf Cathcart and Gordon Targum p 82



4 66 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

place in the social life of catde-rearers the world over as their indispensablesource of livelihood21 is turned to a figure of oppression and exploitation.

The possibility that the three substantives nfa?, Π1Τ0, and ΆΧΠ in v. 2b

have variant interpretations / meanings constitutes another obstacle to under

standing the oracle. The language of this verse highly suggests that the

prophet introduces a new literary image other than the main metaphor, the

"cows of Bashan" (v. la). But the variant interpretations of these words make

it difficult to establish the facts about and nature of the additional metaphor.

Discovering the appropriate vehicle of such imagery will be crucial for the

understanding of the verse and the entire oracle.

The first of these three nouns, ΠΪ3? (fern, pi.), with H|V as its fern, singular

form, is likely derived from the root snn. Lexical evidence shows that there

are also other nouns derived from snn. They include: fê (thorn, barb), pJ¥.(thorn, prick), Γϋ3̂ ¥ Ο2"*» u r n > v a s e> basket), etc.22 Our concern here is with

Π3£ (nfay) which has three possible connotations, namely 1) (fish) hook,

barb, 2) coolness, refreshing (Prov. 25:13), and 3) (large) shield. The third

option "shield" is not only widely attested in the OT both in plural and sin

gular forms (1 Sam. 17:7; 1 Kgs 20:16 = 2 Chr. 9:15; 2 Chr. 11:12; cf. 1 Kgs

10:17), but also supported by the LXXs reading εν δπλοις, "with weapons".23

Moreover, it can be said to be the favourite reading of many commentators.24

Incidentally, "shield" is used figuratively in the OT as simile (Ps. 5:13) and

metaphor (Ps. 91:4) for YHWH s favour and faithfulness respectively. These

hardly fit well into the context of YHWH s threat in v. 2a and, indeed, the

overall context of the oracle. The same applies to the second sense of Π|¥ as

coolness or freshness and, even other cognates of the root snn listed above (cf.

Prov. 22:5, Num. 33:55; Josh. 23:13).

Other interpretations of nfa? which may not easily be discarded are"baskets,25 boats and ropes". However, it needs to be pointed out that baskets /

boats are not used in the text as direct instruments of fishing. The use of the

preposition 3, with r t o and its parallel and synonymous term ΓΠΤΟ points

21 ) For the importance of cattle among the tribes of East Africa, see B. Lincoln, Priests, Warriors,

and Cattle. A Study in the Ecology of Religions (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1981), pp. 14-15.22 ) Cf. BDB, pp. 856b, 857a; B. Davidson, The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (Grand

Rapids, 1850), p. 647a. For detailed discussion on the different interpretations of the nounsderived from the root snn, see Paul, Amos, pp. 130-135.23 ) Although the reading of this verse in the LXX is obscure incomprehensible and therefore



E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 4 6 7

strongly to this.26 This is further supported by the verb Ntol ("lift up", "carry

away") which governs both the two substantives and the preposition. To beobserved is that "ropes" unaccompanied with "hooks" will not catch fish.27

Thus, by extending the meaning of niüV "hooks" to "ropes"28 Wolff was per

haps not thinking of fishing imagery in this text, but that the prophet main

tained the initial metaphor in which ropes would serve as proper means of

leading the cows away.29 Moreover, if such imagery was intended, the prophet

would use the more appropriate term ΠΠ, "hook, ring" (Ezek. 19:4, 9; 29:4;

cf. 38:4; also Isa. 37:29 = 2 Kgs 19:29; also 2 Chr. 33:11, etc.).30

From the

cultural context of the present writer, fish baskets,31

boats and fish pots wouldpresuppose that the fish were already caught (cf. Ezek. 19:4, 9) and destined

for exportation. But that is not the focus of the piel verb Nto used in this

metaphor. Its emphasis is rather on the fisherman's act of fishing as punish

ment on the culprits and not on the caught fish. Interestingly, a good number

of commentators opt for hook or fishhooks, the sense of nìuV that is less fre

quently employed, because the figurative language of v. 2b borders more on

act of fishing than any other.

This is corroborated by the parallel term nVVD, "hooks" or "(fish)hooks",especially when read together with its nomen rectum njn, "fishing, fishery",32

which defines the context more specifically (cf. Jer. 16:16; Hab. 1:14). Lexi

cally, the root TO occurs both in masculine and feminine forms. Hence D^VO

and niTO are employed in the OT, with the fern. pi. form occurring only

here. Outside its sense in this text as "hook", two other possible meanings are

26) BDB, p. 672a.27) Without hooks ropes might not even be used to drag captives away in the manner of the

Assyrians. Cf. W. A. Elmslie, How Came Our Faith: A Study of the Religion of Israel and Its Sig

nificance for the Modern World (Cambridge, 1948), p. 257; also T. Kleven, "The Cows of

Bashan", p. 225.28) H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos, pp. 203-204, 207-208. It must be remarked that it was S. J.

Schwantes who initiated this interpretation when from Akkadian root he proposed "nose-rope,

halter, or reins". Cf. "Notes on Amos 4:2b", ZAW79 (1967), pp. 82-83.29) Andersen and Freedman, Amos, p. 423; See also, T. Kleven, "The Cows of Bashan", p. 221.30)

BDB, p. 296 a; see also Paul, Amos, p. 131.31) We acknowledge that there are also some fish baskets that are used for catching fish. But

they are used as traps that are laid in water for a day or two before they are lifted to ascertain




associated with TD, namely "pot" or "vessel" and "thorn".33 Based again on

the association of the verb Νψ} with hooks or fishing hooks for that matter, itis more likely that the fresh metaphor is that of fishing. Although the fisher

man is not named, the prophet presents YHWH,34

the one who swore an

oath (v. 2a), as also the subject of the verb Nfett and, consequently, the fisher

man. "He [YHWH] will lift you up with hooks and your offspring with fish-

ing hooks" (v. 2b). The threat is YHWH s; he too will execute the judgment

(Amos 6:8).

In several other contexts YHWH has shown himself to be responsible for

similar punishment (Isa. 37:29) .

35

As husband, he threatens and disciplines a wayward wife (Hos. 2:5, 12; cf. Jer. 13:26; Ezek. 16:37-39; 23:26-29), and as

herdsman he disciplines the stubborn flock (Jer. 16:16). It is therefore not

exigent to read tW} in the plural with indefinite personal subject36

in order to

posit foreign powers as agents of divine punishment as many commentators

have done.37

Where agents are needed, it is clearly stated that YHWH

arranges for the fishermen who catch the "fish" and sends for hunters "to

hunt them from every mountain and hill and clefts" (cf. Ezek. 39:4, 5; also

Hab. 1:15, 16). It must be reiterated that the focus of thefishing

metaphor is

not primarily on those to be fished out, or on their reaction, but on YHWH s

action—punishment. The prophet is also not concerned here with the pack

aging or transporting the victims to another location, even though this could

necessitate the use of baskets and pots. Rather he underscores YHWH s

determined will to remove the plunderers from their accustomed habitat. It is

verse 3 that will definitively define the final destiny of the culprits.

Identifying the Protagonists

In Amos 4:1, the prophet identifies two classes of people, 1) the very rich,

consisting of the ruling class called tPÏW "lords / nobles" and their concu

bines, their top class ladies who urge them to exploit the socially weak, and

33) See BDB, p. 696b; B. Davidson, The Analytical Hebrew, p. 576a; also ?z\n,Amos, pp. 132-135.34) A. B. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax (Edinburgh, 1894), § 109.35) Isa. 5:26; 9:12; Mal. 2:3 are some other instances where YHWH is the subject of ni; con

trast Ezek. 29:19.36> See GKC, § I44d, esp. § l44g.



E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 469

2) the exploited group described as D^? (poor) and tïflfrlijt (needy). This

affluent group is further depicted in two special ways. First, they are portrayed in animal metaphor as {ψ|Π ΠΠ3, "the cows of Bashan/' This meta

phor cuts across all genders (male and female) as we have earlier observed,

notwithstanding the gender confusion. Second, they are identified by their

actions, which the three active participles describe so clearly.38 They are well-

known for their actions, as the definite article ha indicates. They are the ones

who oppress (pWV) the poor, crush (Y¡T\) the needy, and whose ladies say, "Bringthat we may drink", thus luring their "lords" to carry out their social crimes.

The three actions described here often came under prophetic criticisms;the first two parallel actions (oppressing and crushing) are possibly performedby the influential men of the city (the rulers and their nobles), while the thirdrefers to the behaviour of the high class but licentious ladies of the capitalcity.39 The women who make the demands are not necessarily part of the ruling class40 but parasitic concubines of the nobles in power (Judg. 19:26-27).The men of the ruling class deprive the poor of their lawful possessions andtheir concubines share in the booty and feed on what their lords have

"robbed". Consequent on these women's insatiable demands, the act of plundering the lower class gets on unabated. These women are in direct contrastwith the woman of Proverb 31, depicted as V*rrTltt>N, a "woman of substance", who looks after her household, including people of low class like hermaids. Rather than depend solely on her husband, she would engage herself in a meaningful business and earn money for her needs.41

The group of the rich is evidently distinguished from that of the sociallyweak peasantry. The relation between them is pictured as that of replete catde

wilfully trampling down their pastures,42

after grazing to satisfaction. Thusthe oppressors are economically prosperous (thick and fattened cows) notonly because they dwell in the land of plenty but more because they grazefreely upon the property of the poor and needy. They do so because they

38) The participles are in apposition with the "cows of Bashan" and by virtue of their being definite are to be regarded each as a relative clause. Cf. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax, § 99.39) Engaging in drinking orgies, which the demands of these promiscuous women from their

lords very much suggest, has been theme of prophetic criticism (Amos 2:8; Joel 3:3).40) In fact, they may not even belong to the elite group; their licence is their beauty, theirplump shape their sexuality, etc



470 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

consider themselves immuned by virtue of their being rulers and nobles and

therefore YHWH s vicegerents. From the present writers own setting, this isquite understandable. Animals dedicated to the gods, especially cows roamfreely without molestation and feed wherever they wanted without hindrances. They are regarded as "untouchables". This idea may have been envisioned in Amos' characterising the rulers and nobles of Samaria with their"Ladies" as "cows of Bashan". The false understanding of their status andpowers as YHWHs vicegerent could have given them undue licence tooppress and plunder the poor without qualms.

But on the other side is YHWH, the main protagonist in the oracle. He isthe only one whose personal name is given, not once but two times. Thename occurs at the middle of the text where he swears by his holiness (v. 2a),and at the end, in an oracular formula (v. 3). He stands in judgment againstthe oppressors and exploiters in defence of the oppressed and crushed (Deut.28:37; Judg. 10:8; Hos. 5:11; 2 Chr. 16:10).

Place names are also given; they include: Bashan, Samaria and Harmon(?).Samaria is mentioned in connection with injustice and oppression and, there

fore, notorious. While Harmon is given as the final destination of the oppressors, Bashan is the nomen regens of the vehicle of the main metaphor. The useof a definite article for Bashan in a genitive relation to ΠΠ3 is curious.43 It

does not occur elsewhere in reference to the characteristic animals that popu

late Bashan—its choice rams and goats (Deut. 32:14); its lions (Deut. 33:22);

its sated cattle (Ezk. 39:8), and its strong bulls (Ps. 22:13. Such a construc

tion is seen again about 15 times in relation to Og the King of Bashan,44 and

once in reference to the land (1 Chr. 5:11) and oaks of Bashan (Isa. 2:13)

respectively. This raises questions whether or not Bashan should be under

stood here as a place name or an extension of the metaphor. Whatever, all

that Bashan denotes—luxuriant plain, fertility, rich rainfall, economic pros

perity, etc.—makes the Bashan a {known place), and stands figuratively in this

oracle for plenty and comfort (Mie. 7:14). This justifies its use as nomen

regens for nh£) in two senses, the one a proper place-name and the other a

metaphorical location.



E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 47 1

The Core of the Matter

As the opening summons λΌψύ (4:1a) indicates, the oracle is given to expose

the social crimes going on in the northern kingdom. Shortly before this ora

cle the prophet has made a charge against the oppression of the poor on the

mountain of Samaria (Amos 3:9). This is only indicative of the various kinds

of oppressive acts against the poor in Israelite society at the period, regardless

of the law that forbade them (Exod. 22:21-25; Deut. 15:9-11). Hence it

became an issue for Amos (3:10; cf. 5:11; 8:4-6). Similarly, "crushing" is one

anti-social act that no citizen is expected to mete out to a kinsfolk or fellow

citizen. It can only be experienced from the hands of foreigners or foreignrulers (Judg. 10:8; cf. Deut. 28:33; Jer. 51:34; Amos 3:9), or in alliance

with them (2 Chr. 16:10). It is therefore an act associated with wickedness

(Job 20:19). To be crushed is to be humiliated (cf. Ps. 74:14). What makes it

remarkable in this oracle is that it is the ruling class or privileged members of

the society that crush their own poor people. Elsewhere the mountain of

Samaria will be associated with the same plunderous behaviour of the privi

leged class for which the prophet indicts them (cf. 6:1).

Biblically speaking, oppressive acts have always merited punishment while YHWH always intervenes on behalf of the oppressed poor.

45This is particu

larly true in Amos as he envisions in this oracle that the social injustice of the

ruling class and their collaborators will never go unpunished, just as in other

instances (Amos 4:6, 7-8, 9, 10, 11). Thus the threat begins in v. 2a with the

oath which YHWH has sworn by his holiness (cf. Amos 6:8; Ps. 89:35). By

this singular act that is sealed by YHWH s very essence (his holiness), YHWH

guarantees his accomplishing the threat (v. 2a; cf. Deut. 32:40; Jer. 51:14;

also Isa. 62:8). The threat is further heightened, as it were, by the eschatologi-cal formula D^S DW, "days are coming."

46Its urgency / immediacy is indi

cated by the particle ΠίΙΠ (v. 2). In all this the prophet presents YHWH as

being determined to carry out the threat. For unlike Hoseas God (11:8-9),

Amos' God does not change his mind, nor does he give a chance for repent

ance since he knows none will be forthcoming. Coote must have had this

45 )Hos. 5:11; Mai. 3:5; Eccl. 5:7; see also Isa. 1:17-20; 5:8; 58:6; Jer. 6:6; 7:6; Mie. 2:1-3;

Zech. 7:10, 11; Ps. 12:5; 140:12; Prov. 22:23; 23:11; Eccl. 4:1.46 ) This phrase occurs about twenty times in the OT. Outside being used two times in the his




oracle in mind when he supposes that, "Amoss oracles imply no response,

have no future, offer no program, and leave no room for repentance. Theylead directly to an absolute dead end".47

With the two verbs Ntttt48 and ^VuJ,49 which as in many cases are used toportray YHWH s threat and judgment, the prophet acquaints his audiencewith the mode of the looming punishment. Interestingly, the piel verb Κψ} in

v. 2 offers the prophet another opportunity to create a fresh but verbal meta

phor to portray YHWH, the subject of the verb, as fisherman and the cul

prits as fish. Like fish the oppressors of the poor and needy will be lifted up

(v. 2b). The threat like many others has future oudook. It is meant to reverse

the fortunes of the noble ruling class and their concubines. The pride of the

thick "cows of Bashan" will be deflected. YHWH will reduce them to mere

fish taken out of water, their natural habitat. In other words, those who once

"grazed" on fertile land and trampled on the lowly poor and needy would be

removed from their comfortable and accustomed environment. The depth of

YHWH s punishment here can only be measured by its lasting consequences

which will go beyond one generation (v. 2b). They will pass from you (M^î?)to ρΐϊηΠΝ, "your progeny," "the ones coming after you" (Ps. 109:13; cf.

Amos 9:1). The motif of such a reversal of fortune is a common one in bibli-

cal literature.50 Since threats are already aspects of divine judgment, the

reversal becomes the launch pad for a full blown punishment in v. 3.

Verse 3 states the judgment passed on the accused, represented as both the

"cows of Bashan" (v. 1) and fish caught in hooks (v. 2). They are the subjects

of nJNltfl51 and sufferers of the action of the verb ΓϋηΛΦΠ.52 The verse reads:

τ ν ·· τ · . · : - : ·

"Through breaches you shall go out, each in front of another. You shall be

cast away to Harmon, says the Lord". There is an irony in the use of the qal 47 )

Coote, Amos, p. 43.

<*> Amos 4:2; Isa. 5:26; 11:12; Mal. 2:3.49 ) Amos 4:3; Jer. 7:15; 2 Kgs 17:20; 24:20; 2 Chr. 7:20; Deut. 29:27. See also Neh. 9:11;

Josh. 10:11; Nah. 3:6; Jonah 2:4; Ps. 51:13; 102:11; 71:9; etc.50 ) 1 Sam. 2:4-8; Job 5:11-13; 34:24-28; Ps. 107:40-41; 113:7-8; Eccl. 4:14; Ezek. 17:24;

Hos. 2:13-15; Lk. 1:52; 18:14; Jas. 1:9-10.51 ) The unusual plural feminine endings -âh of the two verbs are not only longer alternate end

ings but also remnants of the archaic form. Cf. Andersen and Freedman, Amos, pp. 424-425.

52) We shall slighdy emend the hiphil to hophal παΓΟ^ψΠ along the reading of the Septuagint,Symmachus, and the Vulgate. The internal evidence justifies this emendation, since v. 3 brings

YHWH ti i 2 t l ti YHWH i i i th d t h ill

una nueva visión de amós 4,1-3

Documents