The importance of Amos 4 to modern readers stems from the essential value of the message within. While the judgement against Israel is significant, it pales in comparison to the scathing warnings against hypocrisy, tyranny, and stubbornness against God. This is perhaps the message from the text that has the greatest significance to a modern audience. The ancient context of the passage is useful, however, for informing the reasons for Amos’ warning and to provide parallels to the situations that occur in modern society that violate the will of God. Amos is first and foremost a warning to guard against false peace and misconceptions of faithfulness.
Outline
a. 4:1-3- A warning to Samarian women in the form of a doom oracle and ethical critique. Begins with a warrant and ends with a thread of divine judgement.
b. 4:4-5- A satirical call to worship, highlighting falseness of heart and emptiness of ritual. There is both a focus on place and practice.
c. 4:6-11- Fulfilled curse oracles.
d. 4:12- Statement of perpetuation about curse oracles.
e. 4:13- Hymn fragment and threat of divine retribution.
Translation and Texts
I found Stuart’s translation in the Word Biblical Commentary to be helpful, in addition to the NASB and NRSV as secondary translations. I used NIV and NIV 1984 (side by side) as a tertiary source. I give preference to Stuart’s translation because of the extensive commentary notes, and I prefer NASB and NRSV to the NIV. That said, while these inform the reading of the text, the sources are all fairly similar and there are no major translational gaps that limit understanding. While the wording of specific passages may vary, there is no major difference in meaning across the sources, and any major differences in word choice are negated via preference to Stuart.
Literary Concerns
The majority of the text stands as a unit. However, Amos 3:9-15 and Amos 4:1-3 have the same target of prophecy (Samaria) while the rest of the passage is dealing with Israel, and therefore Amos 3:9-4:3 are going to be considered as a slightly conjoined unit, with Amos 3:9-15 informing but not shaping interpretation on 4:1-3.
Amos 4:1-13 are going to be considered an entire unit, but with the caveat that 4:1-3 is going to be in a different stylistic format than 4:4-13, and there will be a gap in interpretive meaning between the two (though both are still relevant as a unit, their cross-interpretation must be noted more carefully than within their own subdivisions.
Amos is the third minor prophet, focusing upon the kingdom of Israel during the final years of the northern kingdom. He anticipates invasion and destruction along with disasters will befall the land of Israel, and declares that the unrighteous lifestyle of the people of the land has cost them their covenant with God, and that He will judge them according to their unrighteousness and their violence which is even beyond that of their pagan neighbors. Amos is a different style of writer from his predecessors, with many first person YHWH oracles (speaking as God) in addition to a supplemental third person narrative, presumably added by another author. He is also regarded as the first of the writing prophets who would have recorded their own oracles, though the possibility of later redaction remains as a key issue for debate, especially with concerns to the hymn fragment contained in verse 13.
While Amos 3:9-4:3 serves as a unit, the hymn fragment in 4:13 is a clear break in thought and Amos 5 is a distinct unit. While the nature of Amos 5 as a dirge has impact to the literary and rhetorical impact of Amos 4, it has minimal input to the meaning of the text as a whole.Form/Genre Analysis
The text is a prophetic oracle against Israel. Amos 4 consists of five components. The first is warning to the Samarians because of their lifestyle (vs. 1-3), the second is a condemnation of the religious practices of the Israelites through satire of their hypocritical worship (vs. 4-5), the third is recounting the signs given to Israel by God and their refusal to return (vs. 6-11), the fourth is an impending doom oracle in verse 12, and the fifth is the hymn fragment in verse 13.
The satirical condemnation in verses 4-5 functions as a critical attack upon the falseness of Israelite worship and their incompatible lifestyles and emptiness of heart.
The warning to Samarians and the doom oracle of verse 12 are both similar insofar as they both foretell impending doom upon the population of the land. While the curse oracles in 4:6-11 have already transpired, verse 12 proclaims that these disasters will continue until Israel has met God’s justice.
Verse 13 is different in style and form, but is used as a declaration of divine power with important rhetorical significance. This hymn is essentially a miniature psalm of praise identifying God as powerful.
Historical context
Amos preaches to Israel after the division between Israel and Judah. Amos himself is a Judean, but is called to minister to Israel. As a result, he has a profession outside of ministry and is not associated with the prophetic guilds. He criticizes both the nature of Israelite worship in the north and the lifestyle of the people within the nation. His activity is agreed to be in the range of 760-755 BC (Hubbard 90)
The people of Samaria have become unrighteous and have broken their covenant with God, and Amos preaches heavily against them in Amos 3:9-4:3 for a myriad of reasons regarding their sinfulness and their lack of justice towards the poor. This is significant because of his locale of Bethel and the fact that many Samarians would visit Bethel for worship and therefore would hear his message firsthand, which includes satire perhaps focused upon the improper location of their worship, but definitely targeting their hollow worship that does not reflect their corrupted lifestyle. Misuse of power and improper or hypocritical worship in the lives of the Israelites were Amos’s key points in Amos’s attacks on the Israelites, and these attacks are illustrated well in the passage found in Amos 3:9-4:5, with both the condemnation of the lives of the Samarian elites and the improprieties of the worship of Israel playing key roles in introducing the suffering Israel has endured for years, yet they did not return to following God.
Amos 4: 1-3 “Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on the mountain of Samaria...”
The first literary device of major import is the “cows of Bashan” idiom on the first line. Multiple sources explain that this is referential to the famous size of such cattle. As a reference to Samarian women, this is heavily explored as an expression of indignation against trophy wives (Allen 103, Achtemeier 197), alcoholism and sloth (Allen 103), oppressing the needy (Stuart 332, Achtemeier 197), or threatening the existing social order (Irwin 231). There are even implications of pagan fertility rituals evident in the text (Hubbard, 155), suggesting that the piety that the wealthy in Samaria expressed in their sacrifices and tithes were not only betrayed by their injustice, but also by their pursuit of other gods. There is even a theory that the analogy to cattle may be an expression to the wealthy nobles taking from the rich by pandering to the king (Irwin 232). All of these meanings have impact and may be true without exclusivity to any one view, as Kleven (217) notes. The following introduction by Kleven (215) is an efficient summary of Amos’s intent of the passage (and the preceding invective against the Samaritans): “IN A SOCIAL SITUATION where the barest necessities of life were a luxury for one class of people so that affluence and indolence might be a way of life for another extremely privileged group, Amos believed that nothing less than the judgment of God, in the form of a terrible reversal of conditions, was imminent.”
The usage of the term hooks is probably related to this allusion, being a butcher’s tool(Stuart 333). The idea that the women of Samaria were like cows exposes the divine anger towards these women that they would be slaughtered like cattle and cast away, not even taken as loot after the battles, but slain because of their sins.
Amos 4:4-5 "Enter Bethel and transgress; In Gilgal multiply transgression!”The satire Amos levels towards the Israelite system of worship is rooted in the hypocrisy and injustice inherent in the institution of their praise and sacrifice. While technically following the prescription of God, in some manner the Israelites have failed to follow the Lord with purity of purpose and methodology. As Brueggemann notes, “[t]hese two verses are usually regarded as prophetic satire which attacks Israel's cult activity because it is done with wrong intentions.” While there has been commentary stating that this is a Judean attack on the Israelite locations of Bethel and Gilgal being used for worship instead of Jerusalem, the idea of the treachery of Israel in the process of worship is a more likely explanation, especially when preceded by such powerful denouncements of improper behavior and attitudes.
Amos 4:6-11 “Yet you have not returned to Me," declares the LORD.
The fulfilled curse oracles are fairly simple in practice- they provide a divine statement that Israel has failed to listen to the warnings of God and is continuing to live in their own sinful manner, recalcitrant against the reform God is attempting to perpetrate in their lives. Hubbard (87) deems that this is God’s “divine No” trying to direct Israel away from the improper lives that they have been living and back towards the covenant of intentional and honest worship before God that is both internalized and externalized. These disasters were meant to be so obvious that even the Israelites with their stubbornness would have to repent, but yet Israel fails to return to the Lord.
Amos 4:12 “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel."
This passage begins with a statement of perpetuation. Because of the failure of Israel to react to the messages sent through the curses in verses 6-11, God is going to use these methods to bring Israel to Him, but not with the merciful gentleness he had formerly used.
The phrase “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel” is found in Amos 4:12. Achtemeier uses this verse to portray the concentrated statement of the message of Amos. The implication of this verse is that not only is judgement impending, but it will be terrible, for the people of Israel will meet God presumably through death. Hubbard states that “the No carried overtones of finality” (87), meaning that the divine judgement poured out towards Israel was not some passing danger that could be weathered like the sufferings of the past, but rather that Israel would be fundamentally and permanently shaken by the events that were to come. There is an argument that the phrase is used to refer to the establishment of a new covenant (Bruggemann 8-9), but this argument is implausible given the impending events that scattered the kingdom of Israel (and the dirge in Amos 5) and the common consensus against this interpretation (Achtemeier, Hubbard, etc.). While the covenant is eventually restored, the immediate purpose of Amos is to challenge the people of Israel to prepare for their own deaths and perhaps appeal to God’s mercy for their transgressions.
Amos 4:13 “The LORD God of hosts is His name.”Amos 4:13 is a hymn fragment. It functions as a transition between the doom in chapter four and the impending dirge in chapter 5, praising the Lord and establishing his power and sovereignty over the land of Israel and the world itself.
The hymn fragment is also important to the rhetorical impact of the text, and though it has been described as irrelevant on occasion, Achtemeier (172) especially makes a powerful argument for the value of this passage, as does a reading of the passage from a rhetorical viewpoint. Where redaction criticism portrays this as an addition by later editing, the idea that Amos would include lyrical references, especially to hymns known to the people of Israel, is not impossible, and there has been a dissenting opinion that the hymns predated Amos and were used as emphasis spoken to an audience that would have heard and understood the statement. Hasel (84) explains the argument that the hymn is a later addition by citing three points- the stark contrast in voice and rhythm from its context, is theologically distinct in the view of God as creator, and uses the title יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי־צְבָאוֹת, which is claimed to have gained popularity after the time of Amos. To say that this precludes the usage of the title would be, in my opinion, fallacious, since Amos as the first literary prophet would have had a significant impact upon Israelite culture. The distinctions between voice and pace are not inconsistent with the understanding of literary impact that is evident in the bulk of Amos’ text. Hasel (85) also cites a number of authors who support the idea that the hymn fragments may have predated Amos, and cites Thomas McComiskey’s form-critical study which states “the first hymn is explicative in function”, who further explains that creation theology is “consonant” with Amos’s theology and supports the theory that the hymns were used for literary impact. An analysis of the Hebrew text is crucial to the impact of the hymn.
Hebrew Words and Usage- Significance in the Hymn FragmentsThe usage of כִּי הִנֵּה (For behold) for emphasis supports the idea that the hymn fragment is a key part of Amos’s literary intent. Even if the text may be a later addition, the emphasis upon this statement immediately after the conclusive line in verse 12 indicates a shift in voice, which implies that discussion of the matter is closed. The use of this phrase (especially the use of a pronoun before the verb in a reversal of Hebrew sentence structure, a technique uses to exhibit emphasis) shows a complete shift of tone and pace, and seals the threat of invasion and annihilation for Israel.
The usage of יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי־צְבָאוֹת (LORD God of hosts) as a name for God is a matter that complicates discussion of Amos. Used throughout Amos, the martial language could be as used as a reference to times of war. According to Pass (254) concerning the usage of the hymns; “one [theory] considers the hymns as confessional doxologies, designed to provide Amos' threats in iv 1-12, ν 1-7 and ix 1-4 with an adequate answer.” The idea of God as a martial or powerful ruler is certainly in line with Amos’ view of God’s power over Israel and the impending destruction via battle of the Northern Kingdom. Similar names for God are used in the Psalms ascribed to David, in Jeremiah, and heavily used in Proto-Isaiah, a chronologically similar work, though also a work that has been stated to be redacted, so the usage of the similar terms could betray redactional or social similarities. The correlation of martial contexts (Davidic rule, Isaiah, and Amos) could provide an insight on the motivation of Amos or a later redactor to associate such a name with God. Ward (7) writes about the similarities of Isaiah and Amos in terms of their theological affinity and their nature as the first literary prophets to each division of the Kingdom (Israel and Judah). The idea that the two were using either divinely revealed language as part of original hymns or using popular hymns of the time to reinforce their messages is not impossible to concede, but becomes muddled in the debate of redaction. Either way, the usage of this language reveals a God with power and authority who does not need Israelite followers, because He has hosts at his command. The power and separateness of God is reinforced by the judgement of the massage, but ironically not by the hymn fragment, which contains no threat of doom or violence but rather establishes the power and glory of the Lord.
The Message of Amos
The key question posited by the text of Amos 4 and the oracle to the Samarians is one of God’s will: can the sentence of doom for Israel in verse 12 be overturned? The text of the oracle, especially with the powerful line “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel” implies a finality to the message against Israel. I believe that there is significance in this message from the literary power of the phrase alone. While ultimately Israel did fall to invaders as prophesied by Amos, an Arminian reader would point out that God could have been persuaded to divert His wrath as He vowed to after the Flood. The greater exegetical question that arises from this question is one of judgement. Would the line “Prepare to meet your God, O America” be met with the same fear as the Israelite audience probably (or should have) experienced? Would the question be laughed off as a madman ranting against a system that is “healthy” from the perspective of human eyes but rotten in the eyes of God? Or would our society deny that there is any problem and assume that a visit from God would be one to bless and not to judge? It is at this point that we begin to recognize that Amos is not concerned with the context of Israel, but rather the issue of a group claiming devotion to God but yet entirely lacking in their complete or at least honest endorsement of their covenant with Him. While it is easy to write off the prophets as speaking to an ancient people, the modern Church needs to hear the challenge present in Amos 4. While we may not have the great signs that Israel had, or we may have according to what manner of examination of recent events is undertaken, there is certainly a great emptiness in the Christian Church, perhaps better expressed as a hollowness. This is not a state of being devoid of internal function, but rather an intrinsic falseness of nature. As Christians, we express our devotion to our God in services and in offerings, but very few actively engage in true and exposed interaction with the hurting world around us, and this is where Amos calls us to repent and turn back to God.
“Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on the mountain of Samaria, Who oppress the poor, who crush the needy... Behold, the days are coming upon you when they will take you away with meat hooks, and the last of you with fish hooks.” There is no liberation from judgement just because of the fact that we believe in Christ, who bled and died to pay the price of our sins. It is quite possible to believe in something yet betray it with actions- for example, one might believe that they can defy gravity with an umbrella, but they will surely have a rude awakening after a short drop. The Christian Church betrays its own teachings when it believes that it can evade judgement because of Christ. The message of Jesus is as much a lifestyle as a philosophy, and the idea that one could adopt just one of the two and be protected is a fallacy that plagues modern theology. While actions are not necessarily the engine of salvation, there is a truth to the fact that a person has only one true nature. While professing the salvation that comes from Christ, it is entirely possible that someone may live a life that rejects the messages and teachings of Jesus and pursues wickedness and corruption instead, eschewing the benefit of the words that they claim to endorse. Amos would warn such a person that they will be judged, not by their attendance at worship services on Sunday morning or by the check that they offer to the church coffers each week, but rather in how they treat the people around them. If someone treats the poor as expendable, they have rejected the love of Christ by claiming that it does not need to extend to others. Upon failing to recognize this internal hypocrisy there is a point at which we can recognize this as being spiritually ill- perhaps this mistake is a symptom of spiritual neglect, but in all likelihood it is also a figment of their unwillingness to follow Christ with their entirety.
While Amos would not have known of or intended his message to affect the way the Church understands God, this in no way invalidates the educational benefits of his teaching to those who would listen. While the doom Amos speaks of is perhaps irrelevant in this age, the desire of God for followers who express true devotion is evident in this text, and is the key of what must be understood in pursuit of a deeper relationship with God beyond simple faith or checklists, and into a journey of self analysis and deeper reflection on being a whole follower of God in both word and action.
Works Cited
Works Cited
Achtemeier, Elizabeth Rice. New International Bible Commentary Minor Prophets I. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers ;, 1996.
Allen, Clifton J. The Broadman Bible Commentary, vol. 7: Hosea-Malachi.. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1972.
Brueggemann, Walter. "Amos 4:4-13 and Israel's covenant worship." Vetus Testamentum 15, no. 1 (January 1, 1965): 1-15. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 30, 2012).
Ferreiro, Alberto, and Thomas C. Oden. The Twelve Prophets. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2003.
Hasel, Gerhard F.. Understanding the book of Amos: Basic Issues in Current Interpretations. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1991.
Hubbard, David Allan. Joel and Amos: An Introduction and Commentary. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
Irwin, Brian P. "Amos 4:1 and the cows of Bashan on Mount Samaria: a reappraisal." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 74, no. 2 (April 1, 2012): 231-246. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 30, 2012).
King, Philip J. Amos, Hosea, Micah: An Archaeological Commentary. 1. ed. Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster Pr., 1988.
Kleven, Terence. 1996. "The Cows of Bashan : A Single Metaphor at Amos 4:1-3." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 58, no. 2: 215-227. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 30, 2012).
Mays, James Luther. Amos; a commentary. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969.
Paas, Stefan. "Seeing and singing: visions and hymns in the book of Amos." Vetus Testamentum 52, no. 2 (January 1, 2002): 253-274.ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 30, 2012).
Reed, Oscar F. "Amos." In Beacon Bible commentary, v. 5 - Hosea through Malachi. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press, 1966. 105-145.
Stuart, Douglas. Word Biblical Commentary: Hosea - Jonah.. Texas: Word, Inc., 1987.Ward, James Merrill. Amos & Isaiah: prophets of the word of God. Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1969.
“ISAIAH, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com." JewishEncyclopedia.com.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8236-isaiah-book-of (accessed October 29, 2012).
Hebrew text copied from
"Amos 4 - Hebrew English Translation Massoretic Text MT Interlinear Holy Name King
James Version KJV Strong's Concordance Online Parallel Bible Study." qBible.com - A Website for Biblical Research. http://qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/amos/4.html (accessed October 29, 2012).
