Amos 1:3
Konteks1:3 This is what the Lord says:
“Because Damascus has committed three crimes 1 –
make that four! 2 – I will not revoke my
decree of judgment. 3
They ripped through Gilead like threshing sledges with iron teeth. 4
Amos 1:6
Konteks1:6 This is what the Lord says:
“Because Gaza 5 has committed three crimes 6 –
make that four! 7 – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. 8
They deported a whole community 9 and sold them 10 to Edom.
Amos 1:8
Konteks1:8 I will remove 11 the ruler 12 from Ashdod, 13
the one who holds the royal scepter from Ashkelon. 14
I will strike Ekron 15 with my hand; 16
the rest of the Philistines will also die.” 17
The sovereign Lord has spoken!
Amos 2:1
Konteks2:1 This is what the Lord says:
“Because Moab has committed three crimes 18 –
make that four! 19 – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. 20
They burned the bones of Edom’s king into lime. 21
Amos 4:1
Konteks4:1 Listen to this message, you cows of Bashan 22 who live on Mount Samaria!
You 23 oppress the poor;
you crush the needy.
You say to your 24 husbands,
“Bring us more to drink!” 25
Amos 5:3
Konteks5:3 The sovereign Lord says this:
“The city that marches out with a thousand soldiers 26 will have only a hundred left;
the town 27 that marches out with a hundred soldiers 28 will have only ten left for the family of Israel.” 29
Amos 8:12
Konteks8:12 People 30 will stagger from sea to sea, 31
and from the north around to the east.
They will wander about looking for a revelation from 32 the Lord,
but they will not find any. 33
[1:3] 1 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” or “sins.” The word refers to rebellion against authority and is used in the international political realm (see 1 Kgs 12:19; 2 Kgs 1:1; 3:5, 7; 8:22). There is debate over its significance in this context. Some relate the “rebellion” of the foreign nations to God’s mandate to Noah (Gen 9:5-7). This mandate is viewed as a treaty between God and humankind, whereby God holds humans accountable to populate the earth and respect his image as it is revealed in all people. While this option is a possible theological explanation of the message in light of the Old Testament as a whole, nothing in these oracles alludes to that Genesis passage. J. Barton suggests that the prophet is appealing to a common morality shared across the ancient Near East regarding the conduct of war since all of the oracles can be related to activities and atrocities committed in warfare (Amos’s Oracles against the Nations [SOTSMS], 39-61). The “transgression” then would be a violation of what all cultures would take as fundamental human decency. Some argue that the nations cited in Amos 1-2 had been members of the Davidic empire. Their crime would consist of violating the mutual agreements that all should have exhibited toward one another (cf. M. E. Polley, Amos and the Davidic Empire). This interpretation is connected to the notion that Amos envisions a reconstituted Davidic empire for Israel and the world (9:11-15). Ultimately, we can only speculate what lay behind Amos’ thinking. He does not specify the theological foundation of his universal moral vision, but it is clear that Amos believes that all nations are responsible before the Lord for their cruelty toward other human beings. He also assumes that even those who did not know his God would recognize their inhumane treatment of others as inherently wrong. The translation “crimes” is general enough to communicate that a standard (whether human or divine) has been breached. For a survey of the possible historical events behind each oracle, see S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia).
[1:3] 2 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Damascus, even because of four.”
[1:3] sn The three…four style introduces each of the judgment oracles of chaps. 1-2. Based on the use of a similar formula in wisdom literature (see Prov 30:18-19, 29-31), one expects to find in each case a list of four specific violations. However, only in the eighth oracle (against Israel) does one find the expected fourfold list. Through this adaptation and alteration of the normal pattern the
[1:3] 3 tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The pronominal object (1) refers to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 46-47. Another option (2) is to understand the suffix as referring to the particular nation mentioned in the oracle and to translate, “I will not take him [i.e., that particular nation] back.” In this case the
[1:3] 4 tn Heb “they threshed [or “trampled down”] Gilead with sharp iron implements” (NASB similar).
[1:3] sn Like threshing sledges with iron teeth. A threshing sledge was made of wooden boards embedded with sharp stones or iron teeth. As the sledge was pulled over the threshing floor the stones or iron teeth would separate the grain from the stalks. See O. Borowski, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel, 64-65. Here the threshing metaphor is used to emphasize how violently and inhumanely the Arameans (the people of Damascus) had treated the people of Gilead (located east of the Jordan River).
[1:6] 5 sn Gaza was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, and Gath). It was considered to mark the southern limit of Canaan at the point on the coast where it was located (Gen 10:19).
[1:6] 6 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3.
[1:6] 7 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Gaza, even because of four.”
[1:6] sn On the three…four style that introduces each of the judgment oracles of chaps. 1-2 see the note on the word “four” in 1:3.
[1:6] 8 tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.
[1:6] 9 tn Heb “[group of] exiles.” A number of English translations take this as a collective singular and translate it with a plural (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV).
[1:6] 10 tn Heb “in order to hand them over.”
[1:8] 12 tn Heb “the one who sits.” Some translations take this expression as a collective singular referring to the inhabitants rather than the ruler (e.g., NAB, NRSV, NLT).
[1:8] 13 sn Ashdod was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath).
[1:8] 14 sn Ashkelon was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath).
[1:8] 15 sn Ekron was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gaza, and Gath).
[1:8] 16 tn Heb “I will turn my hand against Ekron.” For other uses of the idiom, “turn the hand against,” see Ps 81:14; Isa 1:25; Jer 6:9; Zech 13:7.
[1:8] 17 tn Heb “and the remnant of the Philistines will perish.” The translation above assumes that reference is made to other Philistines beside those living in the cities mentioned. Another option is to translate, “Every last Philistine will die.”
[2:1] 18 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3.
[2:1] 19 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Moab, even because of four.”
[2:1] sn On the three…four style that introduces each of the judgment oracles of chaps. 1-2 see the note on the word “four” in 1:3.
[2:1] 20 tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.
[2:1] 21 sn The Moabites apparently desecrated the tomb of an Edomite king and burned his bones into a calcined substance which they then used as plaster (cf. Deut 27:2, 4). See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 72. Receiving a proper burial was very important in this culture. Desecrating a tomb or a deceased individual’s bones was considered an especially heinous act.
[4:1] 22 sn The expression cows of Bashan is used by the prophet to address the wealthy women of Samaria, who demand that their husbands satisfy their cravings. The derogatory language perhaps suggests that they, like the livestock of Bashan, were well fed, ironically in preparation for the coming slaughter. This phrase is sometimes cited to critique the book’s view of women.
[4:1] 23 tn Heb “the ones who” (three times in this verse).
[4:1] 25 sn Some commentators relate this scene to the description of the marzeah feast of 6:3-6, in which drinking played a prominent part (see the note at 6:6).
[5:3] 26 tn The word “soldiers” is supplied in the translation for clarification.
[5:3] 27 tn Heb “The one.” The word “town” has been used in the translation in keeping with the relative sizes of the armed contingents sent out by each. It is also possible that this line is speaking of the same city of the previous line. In other words, the contingent sent by that one city would have suffered a ninety-nine percent casualty loss.
[5:3] 28 tn The word “soldiers” is supplied in the translation for clarification.
[5:3] 29 tn Heb “for/to the house of Israel.” The translation assumes that this is a graphic picture of what is left over for the defense of the nation (NEB, NJB, NASB, NKJV). Others suggest that this phrase completes the introductory formula (“The sovereign
[8:12] 30 tn Heb “they”; the referent (people) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[8:12] 31 tn That is, from the Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Dead Sea in the east – that is, across the whole land.
[8:12] 32 tn Heb “looking for the word of.”
[8:12] 33 tn It is not clear whether the speaker in this verse is the