Classical prophets –Canonical –Pre-exilic

Amos
Amos is the first classical prophet. Classical prophets are those whose oracles have come in
form of books according to ML BARRE-NJBC

It is important to note that Amos inaugurated a movement which left an indemnable mark on
the Israelite religious landscape. In this movement ecstasy is undermined and ignored. It no
longer holds the central position as in the O.T prophets. Ecstasy was one of the key features in
the O.T but with Amos a more rationalistic approach was inaugurated in dealing with the
situation

Reason seems to make sense out of the word of Yahweh

The inaugurated a movement of rationalists who sought to make sense out of the words of
Yahweh

A critical analysis of the book of Amos will reveal even the relevance of Amos’ thought pattern
for Africans in the post-colonial era. Amos can even give lessons to the post-colonial Africans

In African societies, issues regarding dishonest dealings, capitalistic minds and a general moral
bankruptcy have become prevalent such that a revisit of Amos for the benefit of Africa has
become more than necessary
We are to deal with the date of composition of the book of Amos

Date of composition
Scholars agree in principle that Amos ministered during the 8th century BCE so Amos could
have ministered between 799-770 BCE
Arguments have been raised to sustain this dating, amongst such is the superscription which
places Amos in the 8th century BCE, a superscription is an introduction i.e. it does not seek to
introduce the contents of a given piece of literature

It is an editorial introduction which serves two purposes but none of these introduces the
contents of the work

A superscription seeks to introduce the author of a given piece of literature. It identifies the
author
The second purpose is to date the contents of that piece of literature

In most prophetic books, the superscription is contained in the first chapter so in Amos the
superscription lies in Amos1:1

A superscription is much later in origin than the piece of literature thus it seeks to introduce
and it is one area which assists us in dating the time it was written

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 1

In Amos the superscription offers a synchronistic image to arrive at Amos’ dates of ministry.
We are given two parallel events which happen at the same time during Jeroboam’s reign he is
said to have reigned from 786-746 BCE. The dates are not absolute

2nd event- Amos ministered during the reigns of king Uzziah who appears as king Azzaria.
Uzziah is believed to have reigned between 783-742 BCE. So it seems Amos’ ministry was
between the 18th century BCE i.e. 783-746 BCE, APREIOD WHEN Jeroboam 2 and Uzziah
were reigning

Another important aspect with regards to the dating of Amos is that Amos ministered 2 years
before the earthquake yet in the book of Amos the earthquakeis not recorded. According to
Westerman the earthquake mentioned in Amos is the same with that in Zachariah 7:4 if it is
correctit contains that this earthquake is the one that occurred around 752BCE. And this
suggests that Amos ministered around mid 75s from the dates he ministered in the mid-70s

Another aspect is that the historical contents can be used to locate Amos’ ministry. The
historical background pertaining to the Jeroboam and Uzziah reign. Generally people agree
that politics influences everything

The oracles of Amos suggest a period of extreme individualism which was as a result of unfair
distribution of resources (Amos 4:1-2) women of Samaria accused of demanding more a more
from their husbands resulting in the oppression of the poor and this idea seems to suggest a
period when the economy was benefiting less

Historical context within which Amos minister

Some in Israel were tithing after every three days and this suggests extreme extravagance
among the rich. The rich sought to publicise their religiosity.

In the African context people display bunches of dollar notes (4:5). Their intention is to
publicise themselves and not the merciful demands of Yahweh

Amos suggests that there were people in Israel who were filthy rich to an extent that their riches
were stinking. This can be seen in (6:4-7). Amos sites the existence of ivory beds – these days
water beds, the singing of idle songs which is associated with riches.

Amos accuses the rich of drinking wine in bowls and anointing themselves with the finest oil.
All these are believed to be signs of wealth. So many festivals were hosted (5:11), it can hardly
be doubted that Amos prophesied during a time of economic prosperity for a few and the
majority was suffering

According to Von Rad the era of Jeroboam 2 should be seen as the era in which Amos
prophesied especially towards the end of the era Jeroboam 2 benefited from the political and
economic motion proposed by Omri who was responsible for inviting the Phoenicians to run
the Israelite economy
The policies of the Phoenicians were still bearing fruit right through the age of Jeroboam 2

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 2

Basing on the religious ideology of Phoenicians where gods were seen in a hierarchical order,
so their policies were sustained by their religious ideology of hierarchy
During Jeroboam 2s reign and the activities of Amos

National ideology in Israel

Israel was not a doctrinaire nation like Judah whose ideology was the DR ideology. Israel was
possibly a democracy while Judah was a monarchy. The openness in Israel was introduced by
Jeroboam 2 by the time of the division of the monarchy

Israel was becoming a common nation in the ANE. One area which was affected was the land
tenure act system by the lack of a national ideology

By that time, the Israelite society could be divided into 3 social classes i.e. the upper class
which consisted of rulers and soldiers and 2 the middle class which consisted of merchants,
most of the people in the middle class acquired wealth through hook and crook

The lower class consisted of the peasants. In terms of percentage the upper class had 1-3% of
the total population with an access of around 60-80% of the natural resources. This seems to
be what Amos is addressing in his book. Amos saw this as disturbing and this explains why the
poor got poorer and rich got richer. The lower class accounted 80-90% of the national resources
e.g. this happens to Africans probably especially post-independent Africans. Some policies
favour a few blacks at the expense of the majority thereby extending capital imbalances which
the black majority fought to dislodge.

In this case we see the replacement of personalities yet sustaining the system has to be replaced.
The black empowerment sought to replace the people and not the system which had caused so
much suffering, many African countries are facing serious problems(economically) aiming to
policies which entrenched a system that favours a few against the African understanding of the
extended family system and its communal way of life where possessions are in essence.

By the time of Jeroboam 2 there was now bias towards state owned land where ultimate
ownership of the land belonged to the state and such tendencies are noted in the story of Ahaz
and Naboth (1Kings21). There is tension between the new land tenure systems where ultimate
ownership lies in the state against the traditional land tenure system. Naboth did not dispose
the vineyard because it was an inheritance but as the ruling class enjoyed the spoils of excessive
wealth, wealth became a commodity used as a sign of power and security (Amos 7:7) and the
rich added field after field suggesting that they were suppressing the poor. Land has become a
commercial commodity Amaziah in Amos was told

Politically economy Israel had no well-established national ideology. D history has been
manipulated to sustain Israel as a nation

The D.History sustaining the status Q

Scholars argue that the D.History was aimed to sustain a skilled political establishment or
system. The idea of legitimising political misfits as well as dubious policies seems to remain
an integral part of modern day politics as suggested by P.H Gifford who argues that the gospel
SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 3
of prosperity was developed to sustain capitalism by giving it a religious face hence extreme
wealth by an individual is now seen as not in the socio-political economic system but rather as
a religious issue. Such a gospel is seen as diverting the people’s attention from the real cause
of their poverty to some imagined cause hence the real culprits who are causing this untold
suffering are mainly seen as epitome of homo-religious or a religious person. Due to the
extreme poverty the D.History propounded the theory that poverty is a sign of Yahweh’s curse
while prosperity is a sign of Yahweh’s blessing

Due to the impact of the theological propaganda people nolonger sought to address the ills of
the existing system as their poverty could be explained easily. it therefore seems that as it was
during this time that Amos prophesied a period when religion had been formalised(religion is
now being understood from the point of view of the outward demands of the religious faces i.e.
those that can be seen by the naked eye) (Amos 4:4) There is no inward conviction, sin is now
synonymous with religious circles

It is very contemporary in Africa, the filthy rich black Africans who are Christians or Muslims
and the poor Christians and Muslims

Amos can serve as a manual in diagnosing the African problem despite the time difference.
What is important therefore from this analysis is how the era of Jeroboam 2 created a fertile
and breeding ground for the use of social power in relationships. Due to the conflicts in Amos’
book and in more than one instance Amos divide the nation into 2 diverging nations. Amos is
keen to address on those who trample upon the poor. The book of Amos seems to be dated
during the reign of Jeroboam 2

Structure of the book

The book of Amos has been divided into a number of literal categories referred to as literary
type of Amos and among those who subdivide are the superscription (in Amos 1:1). The
superscription is believed to be an editorial interpretation and it has a prolonged purpose. It sets
to identify the author of the literary work

Problems have been noted in this regard especially because of the phrase of the words of Amos
who is among the shepherds of Tekoa. The term among has led various scholars to raise
different arguments. Another problem is that the family line of Amos is not given in the
superscription therefore this has led some scholars like J. Hyatt to argue that Amos was of a
poor background hence the father and other forebearers are not mentioned

2nd purpose of the superscription was to date the era within the literature was written. Another
sub division consisted of the oracles against foreign nations (Amos 1:3-2:5). The authenticity
of those oracles is debatable especially when one considers the confrontation between Amos
and Amaziah, Amos claims to be a prophet sent to prophecy among the Israelites (chapter7).
The question that was to be asked by scholars was why did Amos prophesy to Israel? The
debate has been among scholars as regards the authenticity of the oracles. According to H.W
Wolff, the oracles against Tyre and Edom and Judah are to be discussed as they do not follow
the patterns of the other oracles. According to Wolff the oracles don’t end with the phrase
…”says the Lord”, it is that most contemporary scholars seem to agree with J Barter who argues
SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 4
that these oracles should be understood as introductions to the punch line oracles against Israel.
In this case the oracles against foreign nations acted as a benefit. In the section of the oracles
against foreign nations number of ANE states were indicted for committing crimes against
humanity and they served to pronounce judgement against these nations. This section also
presupposes the existence of an international code of ethics i.e. a moral code of ethics

The other section is the oracles against Israel. These oracles are divided into 2 categories i.e.
the first category consists of summons to hear Yahweh’s word-these consist of Amos’
diagnosis of problems bedevilling Israel and the accusation of the rich classes of society who
are seen as guilty of social injustice

The 2nd category consists of the writing and the new interpretation of the traditions, in these
oracles according to JM Roberts there is a redefinition of popular traditions such as the day of
the Lord, the election tradition and also touches on corrupt worship as well as secure and idle
riches

The 3rd category consists of the visions (7:1-9). In this section there are a series of visions
which are vital in as much as they illuminate the fate of Israel in a series of 4 visions and those
visions are that of locusts, that of fire and that of the plumbline and a basket of summer fruits

Epilogue(9:11-15)
The epilogue is doubted to be authentic because of the sudden hope that it poses and scholars
argue that it presupposes the fortunes of the post exilic era (Amos 9;11). Amos says “in that
day I will raise up the booth of David ie fallen and repair its breaches”. It appears this section
was composed after thefall of the Davidic dynasty as it appears and it appears this was done
after the time of Amos since the house of David remains in power for two centuries after Amos

9:14 “I shall restore the fortunes of my people Israel”. This has been dismissed because of later
edition by the redactor after the fall of Judah

Identity and profession of Amos

2 broad sources of information have been cited by scholars in an attempt to solve the question
pertaining to the identity of Amos and these are biblical material i.e. the superscription and the
confrontation with Amaziah as well as extra biblical material from the superscription1:1. We
know that Amos was among the shepherds of Tekoa. According to some scholars this is a vague
statement in that it’s not immediately clear whether Amos was a shepherd or an ordinary man
among the shepherds. To scholars among does not mean much about identity. If Amos was a
shepherd it is not clear

The phrase among the shepherds of Tekoa raises at least 3 problems i.e. 1st it is not explicitly
clear if any of the stories of Amos, assuming that Amos was a shepherd did he own his own
flock or he took care of someone else’s flock. If Amos owned his own flock, it did mean that
he was of a high social stand because in Israel wealth of social status was measured against the
beast that is owned especially sheep.

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 5

The 3rd problem- assuming that this was a shephered from Tekoa, where was Tekoa? As
illustrated where it was. These problems are compounded more acute instead of us solving
them (7:12-14) confrontation with Amaziah. Amos identifies himself as a boger ie herdsman

Amos argues that he was a herdsman. A shepherd looks after sheep and a herdsman looks after
cattle
The editor wrote that he was a shepherd. Who then should we believe?

In Amos 7:14 Amos identifies himself as one called by Yahweh from following hatsoan ie the
flock. What animals were Amos looking after,he was looking after both

JP Hyatt suggested an ammendment of Nakedim which is a shepherd. He argued that Natadim

can also be found in 2 kings 3:4 where it is translated as sheep breeder, with reference to Mesha
king of Moab is known to have been a sheep breeder. It is in this light that Hyatt concludes that
Amos was a sheep breeder hence he was of a high social status

JH Hayes subscribes to this view sighting that Amos was a dresser of sycamore trees hence he
was a mixed famer practising animal and crop husbandry. In this same view scholars have
sought to align Amos with the wisdom school especially if one considers the way he uses
numerical combination”for 3 transgressions and for 4”. The numerical combination were
commonly used in wisdom school eg (Job 33:14) “for God speaks in one way and in two for
some”. Amos was a cultic functional in this regard

A Holden has dismissed the amendment suggested by Hyatt. Instead he argues that it was
common in the ANE to meet cultic figures looking after birth cattle and sheep. In this regard
he cited the term nagidu which means a keeper of a temple, herd or temple flock. Holden sees
the nationale of Amos taking care of sheep and cattle and also it makes sense why Amos is
referred to as a seer by Amaziah because he was a cultic functionary. Another is from the Ugarit
text. There is reference to a “rbkhmm”. This means chief of priests and this figure is also given
another title which is “rbngdm” which means chief of sheep and its understood as a title used
for one looking after temple flock or herd which came under the same figure. Chances are that
Amos was a cultic figure whose duties of being a seer involved looking after the temple flock
and as has been illustrated was a common practice in the ANE

These observations were from Holden and he has been challenged by other scholars especially
when we move to consider Amos the man we tend to notice problems with the conclusions that
Amos was a cultic figure
In his confrontation with Amaziah, Amos refused any links with cultic staff in Israel in 7:14.
Amos says “I am not a prophet nor a prophets son”. This sense of denial has had so many
explanations. It seems he is denying any link with the cult. For J Hyatt and others Amos reached
to this designation coz it seems to involve the ideas of remuneration he paid and that this time
Hyatt argued that most prophets had turned professional and were now involved in the
complicity corruption hence he did not want to be associated with such prophets whose acts
were undermined. Some prophets were receiving favours from the rulers as they assisted the
rulers to gain political milage

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 6

This calls for a closer analysis to the contemporary African problem. It seems that today’s
African problems involve conspiracy between politics and some religious figures where
religious figures are used or abused by politicians. It is in this light of carrying out an extensive
analysis of amos that it becomes apparent that some religious leaders can be corrupt and hence
they cease to be Yahweh’s reasoning. In many instances in Africa we have witnessed religious
leaders being caught in regime change movements on the other hand, religious leaders from
the same faith are being made to fight one another eg Dafouur region in Sudan

The result of this conspiracy between politicians and religious leaders has been disastrous in
Africa. This can be seen by the number of conflicts in Africa eg the Great Lake region, Uganda,
DRC, defour region. The fight against corruptionin Malawi which led to the step down of the
president from power. It is therefore important to notice that amos could have rejected to be
called a prophet for those and other reasons

Religious leaders are being paid by politicians. Amos could have been an independent prophet.
Centrality given to ecstasy made amos refuse the title prophet. Its possible therefore that amos
realised that the type of prophecy which he was pioneering could not be equalled to his
predecessors

It is important to note that amos was bringing forth anew type of prophecy, besides
undermining ecstacy, amos’ prophecy challenged even the well-known traditional perceptions
on the basis of reason, his approach is rather a rational approach rather than ecstatic prophecy
hence some scholars argue that amos was a social analyst because he analysed through
reason(the problem affecting Israel). Amon the traditional perceptions was the d historian
theology where wealth is seen as a blessing and poverty as a cursefrom Yahweh. In any attempt
to dismiss the fact that amos refused to be called a prophet, for Rowley it is known that the
language does not have a verb to be called a copular, the literal translation should be “not a
prophet…” and the 2nd is “not a prophet’s son”. Within the argument Rowley says if we look
at the preceding phrases, and those that came after the phrase are expressed in the past
continuous terms. This verse when translated theverb to be which was put in the present terms
so that it becomes “I am not a prophet” and the second phrase becomes “I am not a prophet’s
son” its wrong. There was no need to insert the verb to be past tense so that it becomes equal
with the other verses to become “I was not a prophet and I was not a prophet’s son.it is a refusal
of the prophetic office. Rowley argues that amos’ acceptance to be a prophet was not initiated.
He had a profession but he was called a prophet. It is almost impossible to conclude as to amos’
perception of prophecy yet there is little doubt

Scholars say amos pioneered a new brand of prophecy which lasted up to two centuries.
Another question raised by scholars is where did amos come from/ the question is more
interesting because in Israel prophets of Israel seem to be ministering among their ownpeople
eg Isaiah was a southerner and he ministered in Judah

We are certain that he ministered in the north nut was not a northerner. It seems that there are
some scholarly debates among the external and internal evidence pertaining to amos’ origin.
Scholars are divided into two:

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 7

Sourthern Theory
Traditionally amos has been raised by scholars to sustain the theory that Amos was a
southerner

1. Geographical arguement
Tekoa is located close to Jerusalem so when people located the map that Tekoa was in
Jerusalem this is known as the Geographical Argument. Location of Tekoa favoured Amos
being a southerner. Tekoa is a small town 12 miles from Jerusalem and it was 3000 feet above
sea level. It is to the west jungles which became the wilderness of Judea. Considering its
location, scholars argue that Amos came from the south

2. Amos’ language
On the basis of Amos’ language, scholars argue that it was too strong to be a language of a
citizen against his own people
Amos was too harsh and unsympathetic to his own people
Amos 5:2 the funeral dirge/song “fallen no more to rise is the virgin Israel…” suggesting that
Amos had no hope for the resurrection of Israel and for this reason M.Polky argues that Amos
was Judean, a propagandist who sought to create desperation among the people to create
hopelessness as that any hope would be killed off

According to M.Polky killing of hope would mean leaving only once ie turning to the house of
David. This is compared to Hosea who is a northerner coz of his language which was
sympathetic to the Northeners. He promised them room for hope yet Amos said there was no
hope

3. 3 Amos’ confrontation with Amaziah

In his confrontation with Amaziah, it was common in Israel to get prophets stationed at a
particular cultic centre where they earn their bread. At Bethel the person in charge was Amaziah
and we were told that Amos made public announcements.

There is possibility that Amos could have forced his way into this shrine and posed serious
competition with Amaziah such that more people drifted away from amaziah to Amos so much
so that his bread was threatened. Amaziah knowing that Amos was a southerner warned him
to go to Judah “… flee to Judah and eat bread there”

4. 4 the Davidic bias in Amos’ message

According to this school of thought, it is clear that Amos 9:11-15 was written by a southerner
who was interested in furthering the interests because Amos 9:11-15was written by Amos
fanaticised the Davidic ideology. It therefore means that Amos was a southerner

Northern origin of Amos

The essence of this theory is to rebate the argument raised to sustain the southern origin theory.
The first argument is the:

Geographical argument

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 8

According to subscribing scholars the idea of Tekoa should be taken in its rightful context. The
first argument is that the location of Tekoa in relation to Jerusalem cannot be take as an absolute
argument that Tekoa was in the south eg Zim-Moza scenario. Maputo is closer to Zimbabwe
than to Botswana. One cannot base an absolute argument that Tekoa was in the south because
it was closer to Jerusalem.

If indeed Amos came from Tekoa and then according to the text he was a dresser of sycamore
trees then there should be another Tekoa other than that in the south. It has been established
that sycamore trees do not grow in areas with an altitude of 2800 feet above sea level. The
known Tekoa in the south was 3000 feet therefore no sycamore trees grew in that area

It has been established that some subsidiaries of sycamore trees were discovered in some area
around bethel in the north. It has been suggested by some scholars that amos might have been
a northerner

Amos’ language
According to this school of thought it is too simplistic to determine one’s citizenship on the
basis of language usages. It has been noted that even citizens can similarly use the most
implantable language when speaking against their own people. The weakness is that language
cannot be the only aspect used to determine the origin

The language of amos seems to be equal to the venom of social injustice that he was facing. A
closer look at the world events seems to suggest that citizens can be as harsh against their own
people especially when confronted with a thoughtless upper class. In some cases eg in Zim due
to conviction some problems faced by citizens are manmade and because of conviction some
citizens have spoken harshly against leaders/rulers eg Iraq problems where local people enter
into deals with foreigners because they feel their citizens have not done their part. If it is true
that citizens can wage civil wars against one another, it becomes too simplistic to argue that
simply because of unsympathetic language used by amos he was a southerner. The language
of amos was the language of a disgruntled citizen hence he should be regarded as a northerner

confrontation with amaziah

Arguments have been raised regarding the confrontation with amaziah. Amos is accused of
conspiracy and conspiracy is normally a charge against citizens/permanent residents

What Amos was accused of is treason in modern jargon. According to Prey Phelhoe treason is
a crime that can only be laid against a citizen. A foreigner is accused of terrorism and not
treason. Because Amos is accused of treason, this suggests that he was a northerner

Amos is instructed to flee to Judah by Amaziah. If Amos was a southerner, Amaziah would
have instructed Amos to return to Judah and seek refuge there suggesting that Amos was a
northerner. The fact that return is not used but flee suggests that Amos was instructed to seek
refuge in a foreign land

The Davidic bias

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 9

There is almost an agreement between these schools of thought that the author of the epilogue
is a southerner. This southern origin of the author influenced the writer to mention the Davidic
bias

The northern origin has it that the Davidic bias was authored by a southern redactor and this
editor was influenced by the Davidic traditions

It suggests that the epilogue was post exilic. It was written to give hope to the exiles. If it was
a post exilic compilation it means that it was written =- 2 centuries after the ministry of Amos
hence Amos could not have written it and Amos is said to be a northerner. The Davidic bias
was an attempt to neutralise the message of doom by a southern redactor. Therefore it is
imperative that we admit to the observation that Amos was a southerner and he remains an
enigma whose origin is difficult to establish. It has been noted that the arguments depend on
word meanings as if more had inherent or fixed meanings. In the discussion of the identity and
progression of Amos, some scholars argue that Amos could have been involved in the wisdom
circles because of his of numerical combinations commonly used in wisdom schools and that
Amos uses them extensively seems to suggest that Amos had a wisdom background and yet it
would suggest that he was from a high social standing because schools were for the rich Job
33:14. For God speaks in one way and in two. It’s almost impossible to absolutely identify the
identities and profession and citizenship of Amos

The message of Amos

The message of Amos can be understood in the light of socio political and economic conditions
in Israel. The message is directed to the people living in conditions where social injustice has
been accepted in the society. Amos’ audience include foreigners, merchants, judicial, priests
and also rulers. It is important to note that the problems that Amos addresses makes him a
prophet of all times

The oracles against foreign nations (1:3-2:5)

The oracles presuppose that all the 4 cardinal points of the compass are addressed. Amos
addresses nations in all directions. It is interesting to note that Amos is trying to universalise
Yahweh. Yahweh is now portrayed as having interest in all the affairs of the whole universe.
Yahweh is seen as a sovereign God. The oracles against foreign nations are oracles of
judgement and it is the judgement of Yahweh to all nations, judgement is closely related to
jurisdiction, one’s jurisdiction has limits. If Yahweh is not a sovereign and universal God, he
cannot judge other nations but for Amos he is illustrated as universal so he can judge other
nations. It appears according to G Von Rad, those nations indicted for violating an international
code of laws. They were accused of committing crimes against humanity

Acc to scholars who held studies in the ANE, the code of ethics were not written though they
existed. The idea of violating the international law can be highlighted by the contemporary
world where crimes against humanity can be highlighted by the contemporary world where
crimes against humanity have been committed e.g the international community can intervene
in a society if the crimes against humanity have been committed. In the modern world other

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 10

sates intervene but Amos invokes the nations, it is in this light that Amos indicted foreign
nations who committed crimes e.g UN passed a resolution in Dafour crisis in Sudan. For Amos
therefore have acceptable minimum standing by which their dignity can be measured. A human
has rights according to Amos

Damascus
IT IS ACCUSED OF WIPING THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF Gilead in a moment. This
was considered unethical under the international code of ethics ie to wipe the entire nation for
there was need to leave one remnant therefore it was considered unethical. Therefore Damascus
was guilty of violating one of the international code of ethics. Another was that whenever a
nation was subjected in exile a remnant had to b left behind in their land

Gaza
Gaza wand tyre were accused of violence since ANE states were made up of ethnic groups and
taking an entire people into exile was considered as neutralising the entire nation hence a
remnant had to be left behind

Edom
It is believed that in most societies it is acceptable to turn against one’s brother and Edom is
accused of returning swords against Israel, they are brothers. They are descendants of Esau the
twin brother of Jacob who is one of the patriarch forefathers of Israel. Edom had gone to war
against Israel. They had sinned against Yahweh. In the same view many African countries
would be condemned under this as many wars have been waged between/among brothers.
Much could be said about political riddance in African states where blood brothers have turned
against each other because of political differences yet in Amos there is no amount of differences
that can ever neutralise the strong bond of brotherhood.

Ammon
Women have been used as one major point of drumming support by another man. Totally
women have been overprotected. War had been taken as a man’s game. Women were at times
considered as part of the spoils to show their victory. Women were confiscated together with
possessions in war. There was ethical demands besides population protection, the women were
not supposed to be killed in war and it was unethical to kill pregnant women. Ammon the ANE
star was accused of ripping open the pregnant women of Gilead. It is the moment of madness
that led Amos to the indictment of the Ammonites. Worse still the crime was committed with
the intention of expanding its borders so human rights were abused because of one nation’s
dream. Border disputes occur and they are prevalent in Africa which was as a result of
colonisation e.g Eutria and Ethiopia, Cameroon and Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Mozambique
(threatened to take part of Zimbabwe up to Marondera)

Moab.
It was indicted because she did not abide by the ethical standards of accord, a king killed in
combat was supposed to be given a decent burial. This has to be understood in light of the ANE

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 11

understanding that kings were appointed by god and hence they were representatives of their
respective gods. Refusing a king a decent burial was tantamount to desacralizing the gods and
Moab did not only refuse the king a decent burial but she burnt the king to ashes.

Judah
Women were considered for the crimes committed by Judah points to a different scenario
unlike other nations accused of violating the unwritten laws. Judah had the law which was
written about Yahweh and their crime therefore was that they disregarded the law of the Lord..
While ignorance is not a defence but committing a crime knowing is even a serious offense so
Judah is worse than other nations. Judah cannot even use ignorance as an immogatory
circumstance because she had the law of Yahweh. Judah was in a position of a nation that
ratifies an international law and then wilfully decides to violate such a law, under those
circumstances there can be no excuse, they had to abide by the law. Among the owing crimes
committed by these nations, Yahweh the sovereign God was going to judge all the offenders
and it is in this light that scholars that the numerical combinations used by Amos were meant
to show the gravity of the offense and not literally or as they appear in the book of Amos. In
the book of Amos we can interpret it therefore as committing crimes again and again. Amos
does not see any hope for these nations hence he is sometimes called the prophet of doom.
Yahweh therefore is seen as a God whose interests was in defending the wronged and assuring
that justice prevails in and among the nations therefore on the contemporary world, they are
dominated by super-powers whose interests are self-centred e.g USA attacked Iraq because of
oil. Unlike the contemporary super-powers, Yahweh is understood as a superpower whose
interests lie in seeing justice prevailing. Yahweh’s interests are not self-centred.

Oracles against Israel

First and foremost we should appreciate that the Israelites would have rejoiced at the demise
of their enemies ie the foreign nations. In Israel Amos addressed different social groups which
are indicted on specific charges suggesting that Israel had a corrupted system which favoured
only a few. Africa is facing the same problem. There is a tendency of re[lacing white
bourgeoisie with black bourgeoisie. Among the addressed are the rich, rulers, merchants,
priests and the judiciary. These are the targets of Amos but that does not exclude the poor cause
corruption can be contagious ie why Amos does not promise the poor heaven and earth.

Wealth as a corrupt element

In this text Amos lists a group of unethical behaviour of most of the aforementioned groups the
way Amos addressed the groups suggests that if ever morality existed in Israel, it was confined
to a few people. Amos cites examples of the type of life that was common in Israel. This
includes selling the righteous and the needy for silver and a pair of shoes. Another phenomenon
is that a son and the father were engaged in an intimate relationship with the same maiden and
they lay down before the altar upon garments taken in pledge. This is referred to by scholars
as cultic prostitution. They drank wine and what had been paid as fine went missing. The priests
drank with prostitutes. From Amos’ address of what was happening then it is clear that Israel
no longer had any moral fabric upon which her own people could be judged. The love of

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 12

economic power made the Israelites heartless to the extent of selling anything they could
include the righteous and the poor. In this case Amos seems to accept that power corrupts and
therefore when one searches for power in a social setup one has to learn to be corrupt and
heartless. The nature of the crimes and immoral activities are normally associated with those
who could not afford a decent meal. Some did not have shelter above their heads and some had
no clothes. It is important to note that Amos does not dismiss riches, it is not a crime to be rich
but there is a level of playing ground for all to search for wealth. Rather there were policies to
sideline the poor for their meagre resources especially land because it was the key means of
production in Israel. As what happened in Africa before independence and most countries, the
poor were forced out of their land and were forced to seek a job for them to pay for them. But
in essence that did not sustain the Africans so much means of production is returned to their
owner, they will be able to sustain themselves. It is morally acceptable to redress those
imbalances in a deliberate policy to empower the poor is seen and the solution to curtail the
unequal distribution of land. The rich continued to add field upon field acc to Amos and the
poor continued to lose their small pieces of land to the rich. In a similar way the redressing of
such a situation requires policies that that make it morally reprehensive if not criminal if anyone
seeks to acquire land that will make others lose it. Equal distributions of land had to be done.
Other forms of riches are noted in Amos 6. Among these are the ideas of the rich sleeping on
ivory beds and in the contemporary world ivory beds are water beds.

The other idea is of the rich whiling up their time singing idle songs (the lyrics would be
meaningless) for gods sometimes, jazz music with instruments and in for the rich generally
classical jazz to while off time. The rich also drank wine in bowels (cause they heard that it’s
normally associated with wealth and power, in some instances, these criminal acts are
committed by the poor at the instigation of the rich suggesting that the rich are always behind.
The rich were also responsible for the abuse of power which was present in Amos’ time eg
2000-shortage of food in Zimbabwe. Those in the forefront of selling things illegally were the
poor in the high density suburbs and the power champions of selling the commodities. A close
analysis suggests that the poor selling the commodities were being supplied by the rich. Several
other problems of the African continent have been prescribed to the key economic powers who
implemented the African problems eg USA in the DRC conflict. They are given a few dollars
to fight against themselves and the USA benefits thus it is clear that economic power can be
abused and those who abuse are those who obtain power by frauding means. In some cases the
few who have immense economic power become so ruthless in their attempts to sustain it hence
the idea of man made problems as those in 2008 in Zimbabwe. It is in this light that one can
understand the D.Historian theology of curse and blessing. As it seems more logical to argue
that it was bankrolled by the economic mogues who sought to legitimise riches. Blessings fell
to those who were rich, long life span, ability to proceed especially sons and rich materially.

Politicians sponsor religion eg gospel of prosperity. The D.Historian theology is a theology

challenged by Amos on the basis that it was legitimising riches which had been acquired
through unethical means. It was a theological development by prophets to divert the attention
of the people from the real cause of their perplexity. For Amos the poor are in their condition
coz the rich trample upon the poor and exploit them. The poverty which was prevalent in Israel

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 13

was influenced by man made factors rather than the religious standings of the poor. The women
of the nobility are accused of encouraging poverty by continuously demanding more from their
husbands. To extract from the poor and the husband in their quests to impress their wives
exploit the peasants to extract more and more to provide for their wives. Acc to Amos both the
wives and the husbands are good at inducing poverty cause of their insatiable appetite. The
women are compared to the cows of Bashan and the cows are known for their high quality
fodder and it therefore meant that the cattle were very fat suggesting that the women of Samaria
were rich. Such tendencies of exploiting the poor for individual gains are prevalent in the
contemporary world of capitalism and so during Amos’ time one can detect a shift from
communalism which had sustained Israel to capitalism.

The idea of excess riches.

We are guided by the general basic necessity of life ; food, shelter and clothing. With these
Amos notes with concern that in Israel at that time there were some among the population who
did not afford a decent meal. Some did not have shelter above their heads and some did not
have clothes. It is important therefore to note that Amos does not dismiss riches, it is not a
crime to be rich but there has to be a level ground for all to access the riches. Rather there was
a policy sideline the poor of their meagre resources especially land cause it was the key means
of production in Israel. As what happened in Africa before independence in most countries the
poor were forced out of their land it is generally and were forced to seek a job for them to pay
for their rents. But in essence that did not sustain the Africans so much so that unless the means
of; production is returned to its owner then they will be able to sustain themselves. It is morally
acceptable to correct those imbalances with a deliberate policy to empower the poor and the
solution to curtail the unequal distribution of land. The rich continued to add field upon field
acc to Amos and the poor continued to lose their small pieces to the rich. In a similar way the
correction of such a situation requires policies that make it morally reprehensive if not criminal
if anyone seeks to acquire land that will make others lose it. Equal distribution of land had to
be done. Other forms of riches are noted in Amos 6. Amos listed that among these are the idea
of the rich in ivory beds, idle songs, drinking in bowls and summer as well as winter houses.
Acc to Amos these are all signs of ill gotten riches. Those who were hard working did not own
these luxuries but the crooks enjoyed the riches, ill gotten riches cannot be connected to
blessings. In this view Amos disregarded the deutronomistic theology in Amos 5:21-23. It is
clear that Israel was characterised by festivals, parties were thrown day in day out. For a family
which is failing to acquire basic things needed in life, is it fair? One can only throw a party if
they have goods or funds which are surplus.

Despite the fact that poverty was the order of the day in Israel, the rich held festivals thus
Amos argued that Yahweh despises such festivals. It is therefore clear that for Amos the use
and abuse of religious ideology in sustaining evil practises should be discouraged hence Amos
disputes the D.Theology. in Africa for example according to P.Gilford the gospel of prosperity
was established to draw the people’s attention from the policies of I.M.F and the World Bank
and emphasising a theological concept that makes people blame themselves for being victims.
For a long time women were sexually abused and were meant to blame themselves. Amos
thinks its high time women take stand and blame and identify the areas of victimisation.
SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 14
Unethical markets
It is generally agreed that Amos’ observations are too extreme in Israel ie the filthy rich and
filthy poor the other hand. To Amos it seems in Israel the middle class had been killed hence
the idea of two extreme groups. This was a correct assessment on the ground; in most cases
such diction of the two extremes is sustained by a consented and calculated system that makes
it possible for the underprivileged to improve themselves regardless of their religious standing.
It is in this light of adictiotic which is sustained by well calculated systems that Amos in the
business ethic consultant. The theological explanations have been used over the years to justify
exile sytems were now being challenged by a set of ethical standards from which one could
judge those considered as full people. The need for proper businesss ethics for Africa an never
be und4erstiid considering that more of them not African peasants have been powerless in a
world that seems to have perfected the end of economic cannibalism and during Amos time
like in any contemporary African nations in the universe in general, ethics have been
substituted by insatiable needs to maximise profits. Amos therefore presents a set of ethics that
are practical in an attempt to bring back the things of the old days. The ethics that Amos
prescribed were not completely new but he sought to re-establish the ideal society that Israel
had always wanted to be. Various unethical elements which were now there in Israel needed to
be resolved and those included bribery, profiteering and prostitution.

Bribery.
The wealth can be concentrated on by a few people. For Amos it was the unorthodox means
used by a few people to acquire wealth. Amos also reversed the concept of the day of the lord
which had a long history in the ANE but to Israel it came to mean a day within which Yahweh
would come and intervene in the world history on behalf of the Israelites. Yahweh would come
down against all the enemies of Israel and fight against them. So it was seen as a day for the
Israelites due to the demise of the enemies. The day was seen as a day of deliverance of the
Israelites by Yahweh and would have dominion over all the nations. But Amos reversed the
traditional understanding then saw it the opposite to what the Israelites were expecting and so
in Amos 5:18 he proclaimed a war to Israel and all those who desired the day of the lord. This
understating of Amos was shown by the Israelites because of them being the elected race so
they were privileged and hence their lifestyle would not undermine the day of the lord. To
Amos election meant responsibility and privilege. The Israelites were entitled to greater
responsibility therefore for Amos for all the sins of Israel she had to be punished and her
punishment was to be severe. It was to be worse than other nation’s coz of her election. Her
enemies could appeal to ignorance of the law but Israel had no excuse hence the day of the lord
was a day of darkness. Israel had no obligation in terms of responsibility as a chosen nation.

On the issue of bribery, the rich cause they were too rich bribed the judges. The conspiracy
went on between them and has perfected the art of profiteering not the man. It is clear that all
the unethical standards cited by Amos are to be prevalent to today and so the poor of today like
the poor of Amos time keep losing daily hence become poorer by the day while the merchants
become richer. This also is prevalent in the banking system whereby the interests that you get

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 15

cannot suit the bank charges. For Amos such practises are the major cause of poverty in many
nations. The only practical way to fight poverty is by reversing such practises.

I MO RAL IT Y
The solution obtaining in the 8th BBE in Israel was a concern to the people who wished good
for the human species, immorality had born so that the disputable was new common and
acceptable .The immorality cannot be understood fully outside conditions we have been noting
above .Be where are only concerned reaping so much so little resulting in many people
becoming desperately poor.

-It is under such circumstances that human beings whatever they posses and make it an asset
of that least making it a means of survival.

-A disturbing example of father and son going to the same maiden, they took turns (2:7) with
the same maiden
-It is normally unacceptable that a father and a son share the same women
-The struggle a nation which had become normally bankrupt such that wealth and poverty had
now blinded both, the rich and the poor and the white fabric had been broken

-Also in Israel was cultic prostitution prevalent. The priests were not left behind .This was
spearheaded by priests and ritual women.
-This was moulded in the mode of the fertility cult of baalism.

-In this Baal fertility cult, it was believed that female counterpart Ashera and these would enter
the sexual union, a new year which resulted in fertility being guaranteed ie soil, fertility, animal
and human

-It was believed that a priest and ritual women had to do the same to guarantee fertility of the
family and also……
-In Israel this Canaanite idea had been adopted into the land

-For Amos, such acts were being done on the holy alters of Yahweh (2:18).It is in this light
that one can understand the majority of prostitution cases, the poor were forced into prostitution
because of poverty

-One can understand this in the third world countries, whereby the poor are made into sexual
practices by the rich because of their desperation need to survive and because of limited deserts

-Can such acts be solved without addressing the economic power in the hands of very few
people initial such a time that economic cabbalism is addressed cases of immorality will be
there to haunt the human species eg Ladies who flock to the UK had turned to stripers
,pornographies ,dancers etc causes poverty in the country.

RELIGIOUS FORMALISM IN ISRAEL

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 16

According to Amos and his expression, it seems that the most committed sin was that of
formalizing Yahweh .It seems that Israelites had approach to Yahweism as it became a formal
practice

-There was now emphasis of out ward demand of a religion tens to operate in two dimensions,
there is an internal level were religion seem to transform the way of life of an individual ,moral
call.

-There was now external emphasis of Yahweism hence to Amos religion had become empty
and meaningless because there was no correspondents between what the people were doing
within the synagogue on what they claimed or did outside the synagogue

-There was an individual for the synagogue and individual for the market place in one person
.At the synagogue the person pretends to be holy and at the market the same person steals
among the people .It is common in the African context eg gospel music

- Formal religion is pre-occupied with outward practice and these can discern by a named eyed
eg tithe rituals.
-According to Amos 5:12-23 take no delight in our so term assemblies for burnt offerings and
cereal offerings ,I will not accept ,take away from the noise of the songs….All these are
outward yahweism demands, that their lifestyles did not match with what they believed in.
-They were tithing after every 3 days in Israel because they made money at the marks

-Besides tithing ,they were also proclaiming free will offering e.g in Zimbabwe people bring
offering for the pastor to buy the clothes or shoes .To Amos ,this becomes a problem because
they were publishing e.g big first were publishing what they were praying thereby making the
poor feel out of place .

-To Amos in such a religion it can only sustain economic cannibalism hence some say one of
the form of reign (cannot breeds capitalism)
-According to Togarasei there are some churches in Harare where people pledge and tithe
simply to show their economic muscles. To Amos such churches or religions are immoral

-In Israel this was sustained by the real ideology ,the D theology which gave the rich the
impression that they where righteous while the poor were cursed and yet as Amos observed
most of the rich people had acquired their wealth by host and crook and both hence and
theology which sustained evil had to be discarded.

-I essence the D theology needed the interpretation and it seems that it is in this light that Baal
Gifford had developed his gospel of prosperity began to take a centre-stage within people
realize E.S.A.P was creating economic problems by Pentecostal movements which had
American connections

-For Amos YAWHEH didn’t bless actually, it was obvious that the poor were cursed but rather
the rich were cursed because they acquired profit through unfair means

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 17

-To Amos reign could be a phenomenon which should make society more compact and people
could acquire wealth by harvest means

-Reign should also transform the lines of people for them to be to be more tolerant to each
other irrespective of their economic muscles

-To Amos the economic power’s abused reign can easily be used to sustain unethical practices
.It is easy for those with economical power to abuse religion

-On the pretex that righteousness is difficult to maintain so only a few can be blessed
accordingly hence all the wealth can be concentrated on by a few people .For Amos ,it was the
unethical means used by a few people to acquire wealth by few people

-Amos also reversed the concert of the Day of the Lord which had a long history in the A.N.E.H
Israel it came to mean a day within which Yahweh was intervene in the world history on behalf
of Israel .Yahweh would come down against all the economics of Israel and fight against them
-So it was seen as a day for the Israelites due to the demise of her enemies for the adversaries

-The day was seen as a day of the deliverance of the Israelites by Yahweh and would have
dominion over all the nations
-But Amos reversed the traditional understanding
-To Amos election means responsibility and not privilege
-The Israelites were entitled to greater responsibilities.

-For all sins of Israel, she had to be punished and her punishment was to be severe it was to be
worse than other nations because of elections

-The enemies could appeal to ignorance (of the law) but Israel had no excuse hence the day of
the Lord of darkness
-Israel had an obligation in the terms of responsibilities as a chosen nation

Assignments
1. .How far did the economic prosperity of Israel during the time of Amos affect
vulnerable groups?

2. Amos was a madman. Discuss

3. Amos was a prophet of Doom. Discuss

4. To Amos punishment was inevitable so there was n point to his prophecy. Assess the
validity of this assertion.

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 18

 5. With Amos prophecy entered a new stage. Discuss

6. ‘The Book of Amos is all about God’s judgment. The Book of Hosea is all about
God’s love.’ Discuss

7. ‘Amos was nothing more than a prophet of social justice.’ Do you agree?

8. ‘Amos prophesied that Israel could not escape total destruction, so there was no point
to his prophecy.’ Critically examine this claim.

9. Explain why those who heard the prophecies of Amos found his message so hard to
accept.

10. ‘Amos was more a prophet of doom than a prophet of social justice.’ Discuss.

11. ‘The message of Amos is about God’s judgment and not about God’s love.’ Discuss

12. Examine critically Amos’ use of the idea of the Day of the LORD.

13. How applicable is Amos’ message in your society?

SIMOYI Z.J. 0772 302 556 [email protected] Page 19