Amos 9

Amos 9:1-6

Amos 9:1-6. The fifth vision, the smitten sanctuary. The people are all assembled for worship in their sanctuary: Jehovah is seen standing by the altar, and commanding the building to be so smitten that it may fall and destroy the worshippers: none, it is emphatically added, shall escape the irrevocable doom. The worshippers are manifestly intended to symbolize the entire nation.

Amos 9:2-4

2–4. In whatever direction they flee, wherever they essay to hide themselves, and even though they should be in captivity in the enemy’s land, they will not be able to elude the Divine anger.

Amos 9:3

3. Two other examples of remote or inaccessible hiding-places, similarly contrasted; Carmel, rising abruptly out of the sea, and the depths of the ocean which it overhangs. Carmel was in two ways a hiding-place: (1) As usual in limestone formations, it abounds in caves—said by some to be more than 2000 in number—often of great length, with narrow entrances, and extremely tortuous. These caves are “so close to each other that a pursuer would not discern into which the fugitive had vanished; so serpentine within, that ‘ten steps apart,’ says a traveler[198], ‘we could hear each others’ voices, but could not see each other’ ” (Pusey). (2) The summit of Carmel, about 1800 ft. above the sea, is thickly wooded (see the descriptions quoted on ch. Amos 1:2; and comp. Micah 7:14); in the first cent. a.d., according to Strabo (xvi. 2. 28), its forests were the retreat of robbers.

Carmel, projecting into the sea, would be the last hiding-place in the land: if a fugitive found no safety there, he could seek it next only in the sea. But even the sea, as the next clause says, should afford no safety for these Israelites. [198] Schulz, Leitung des Höchsten, v. 186; Paulus, Reisen, vii. 43.the serpent] In warm tropical regions, highly venomous marine serpents (Hydropidae) are found in the sea (see particulars in Cantor, Zoological Transactions, ii. pp. 303 ff., referred to by Dr Pusey). They are not, however, known in the Mediterranean; and the reference is more probably to an imaginary monster, supposed by the Hebrews to have its home at the bottom of the ocean, and to be at the disposal of the Almighty.

Amos 9:4

4. Even in captivity they would not be safe; they might escape the destruction of the foe, but the Divine sword should yet overtake them. before their enemies] Driven before them, like a flock of sheep: cf. Lamentations 1:5. I will set mine eyes upon them for evil, and not for good] To set the eye upon is elsewhere found always in a good sense = to keep watch over, take under one’s care (see Jeremiah 24:6; Jeremiah 39:11). For evil and not for good, as Jeremiah 21:10 (with “to set the face against”), Jeremiah 39:16; and (with “watch over”) Jeremiah 44:27. God’s watchful care and love is transformed, through His people’s sin, into hostility (cf. on Amos 6:8).

Amos 9:5-6

5–6. Such a terrible announcement of judgement might seem to need confirmation: Amos therefore pauses, to describe, in two majestic verses, the power of the God who has been provoked, and who thus threatens His vengeance: all great movements in nature are due to Him (Amos 9:5); He sits on high and can control the elements (Amos 9:6).

Amos 9:6

6. That buildeth his upper chambers in the heaven, and hath founded his vault upon the earth] The Hebrews pictured the sky as a solid vault (firmamentum), resting at its extremities upon the earth (Job 26:11): in this vault the heavenly bodies were imagined to revolve: “in front of it” (i.e. in the open air below its lower surface) the birds flew (Genesis 1:20): above it were reservoirs in which rain was stored (as also snow and hail); and above these “waters above the firmament” Jehovah sat enthroned. The words are thus intended to illustrate Jehovah’s power by pointing to the palace which He has constructed for Himself on high, and firmly secured, by resting its foundations upon the solid earth. The word rendered upper chambers elsewhere means ascent, steps (hence A.V. stories, i.e. successive heights), which has been adopted by some commentators here (as though the reference were to the ascent or steps by which Jehovah’s heavenly palace was to be reached). But most authorities treat ma‘γlβh here as a synonym of ‘γliyyβh in Psalms 104:3, “Who layeth the beams of his upper chambers in the waters,” cf. Amos 9:14 “Who watereth the mountains from his upper chambers.” vault] lit. band,—properly, it is probable, like the Arab.’ijβd, an arch, as something firmly held together. The word (which is a rare one) is used elsewhere of a bunch of hyssop (Exodus 12:22), of the bands of a yoke (Isaiah 58:6), and of a band of men (2 Samuel 2:25). Here it denotes what is usually called the rβḳ ?ξa‘(lit. something beaten or spread out)[199], the (στερέωμα, or “firmament,” the vast hemi-spherical vault which, to the eye innocent of the truths of astronomy, seems to rest as a huge cupola upon the earth. [199] Comp. the cognate verb, as applied to metals, Exodus 39:3; Numbers 16:39 : Jeremiah 10:9; Isaiah 40:19 (R.V. spreadeth over).that calleth for the waters of the sea, &c.] repeated from Amos 5:8 b (where see note). The violent, and long-continued rains, occurring in Eastern climates, are another proof of Jehovah’s power over nature.

Amos 9:7-10

7–10. An objection met. The Israelites were only too ready to argue (cf. Amos 3:2; Jeremiah 7:1-15) that Jehovah, after the many marks of favour which He had bestowed upon His people, would never cast them off, as He had now declared that He would do (Amos 9:1-6). He replies, Is Israel, merely as Israel, apart from moral qualifications, more to Me than other nations? It is true, I led Israel out of Egypt, and gave them a home in Palestine: but I directed similarly the migrations of other nations, the Philistines, for example, and the Syrians: the sinful kingdom, whether it be Israel or any other nation, will perish before Me, the only limitation being that I will not absolutely annihilate the house of Jacob. Are ye not as the sons of the Kushites unto me?] The Kushites, or Ethiopians, are mentioned as a distant people, far removed from the grace and knowledge of God, despised on account of their dark colour (cf. Jeremiah 13:23), and perhaps also on account of slaves being often drawn from them. Degenerate Israel is no more in Jehovah’s eyes than these despised Kushites. Kush is often named in the O.T. (e.g. Genesis 10:6-7; Isaiah 11:11; Isaiah 18:1; Isaiah 20:3-5; Isaiah 37:9; Isaiah 43:3): it was the name (in Egyptian Inscriptions Késh) borne by the people inhabiting the region to the south of Egypt (corresponding generally to the modern Soudan, i.e. the country of the Blacks (Arab, aswad, “black”). Their capital was Napata, on the Nile. Did I not bring up Israel out of the land of Egypt?] cf. Amos 2:10. and the Philistines from Caphtor] guiding them therefore not less than I guided Israel. Caphtor is in all probability Crete[200]. It is named elsewhere as the original home of the Philistines; see Deuteronomy 2:23 and Jeremiah 47:4 (where the Philistines are called “the remnant of the isle [or coast-land] of Caphtor”). These passages make it probable that in the ethnographical table of Genesis 10, in Amos 9:14, “and the Casluhim, from whom the Philistines came forth, and the Caphtorim,” the clause respecting the Philistines is misplaced, and should be transposed to follow Caphtorim. A connexion with Crete is also rendered probable by the name Kerçthim, which in other passages (Ezekiel 25:16; Zephaniah 2:5; cf. 1 Samuel 30:14) is that of a tribe closely associated, if not (Zephaniah 2:5) identical, with the Philistines. [200] Sayce formerly, with Ebers, identified it with the coast-land of the Delta; but he now (Academy, Apr. 14, 1894, p. 314) regards this view as untenable.and Aram from Kir] See on Amos 1:5.

Amos 9:8-10

8–10. Jehovah’s eyes are against (Job 7:8) the sinful kingdom, whatsoever or wheresoever it be, and He will destroy it from off the face of the earth (Deuteronomy 6:15), save only, if the kingdom be that of the chosen people, it will not be destroyed by Him utterly: only the sinners in it will perish. Though the nation, as a whole, might be corrupt, and deserve to perish, it might well include many individuals who were the humble and faithful servants of Jehovah (cf. Isaiah 29:19); these, in the picture drawn by Amos, escape the judgement, and perpetuate the national existence of the people of God. There is implicit in these verses (cf. Amos 5:15) the thought of a faithful and worthy “remnant,” which should survive a catastrophe, and form the nucleus of a purer community in the future, which was adopted afterwards by Isaiah, and became one of the most characteristic elements of his teaching (Isaiah 1:26-28; Isaiah 4:3 f., Amos 6:13 b &c.).

The words are really a limitation of the unqualified judgement expressed in Amos 9:1-4, a limitation demanded partly by the justice of God, partly by His faithfulness to His covenant-promise (cf. Jeremiah 4:27; Jeremiah 5:10; Jeremiah 5:18; Jeremiah 30:11).

Amos 9:9

9. The nation must go into exile (Amos 4:2 f., Amos 5:27 &c.); it must even be shaken to and fro among the nations, as in a sieve: but no sound grain of corn will fall to the ground and be lost. The dispersion of Israel in all directions is compared by the prophet to the movement of a sieve, in which the solid grains, though violently shaken about, are retained and preserved, while chaff and dust fall through the meshes to the ground. The least grain is lit. a pebble, appar, fig. for a solid grain, though the word is not elsewhere so used. Preuschen (Z.A.T.W[201] 1895, p. 24) supposes the reference to be to the pebbles left behind in the sieve (kirbâl), as still used in Syria for cleansing the winnowed corn. [201] .A.T.W. … Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft.

Amos 9:10

10. which say, The evil shall not draw near, or come in front about us] i.e. shall not meet us in any direction. The sinners whom the prophet has here specially in view are those who, trusting to the fact that they were members of the chosen people (cf. Amos 3:2), or relying upon their zeal in an external ceremonial (Amos 5:21 ff.), deemed themselves secure, and declared that misfortune could never overtake them (cf. Amos 6:3). Their false security, says Amos, should be the cause of their destruction. Cf. similar expressions of security, uttered in defiance of the prophets’ warnings, Isaiah 5:19; Micah 3:11; Jeremiah 23:17; Ezekiel 12:22; Ezekiel 12:27.

Overtake (A.V., R.V.) may be a legitimate emendation (ϊωׂ ?ιβ for ϊβιωׁ ?[202]; cf. Deuteronomy 28:2; Deuteronomy 28:15, in the Hebrew), but it is no rendering of the existing text. Prevent (A.V., R.V.) is, of course, used in its old sense of come before, which it has in such passages as Psalms 18:5 (A.V.), Psalms 59:10 (A.V., R.V.), Psalms 119:147-148 (A.V., R.V.). [202] Or rather, as should no doubt be read (the Hiphil conj. being elsewhere transitive), ϊִּ ?μֹ ?ωׁ (Psalms 91:7).

Amos 9:11-15

11–15. The Epilogue Amos closes, as the prophets are wont to close their discourses, with the promise of a brighter future. The dynasty of David, though for the time humbled, will be reinstated in its former splendour and power (Amos 9:11-12); and the blessings of peace will be shared in perpetuity by the entire nation (Amos 9:13-15).—On the question of the authenticity of the epilogue, see above, p. 119 ff. In that day] The day which the prophet has in his mind: here, the day of restoration, which is to succeed the catastrophe of Amo 9:8-10. The expression is a common one in the prophets, especially Isaiah, who use it for the purpose of introducing fresh traits in their pictures of the future (see e.g. Isaiah 2:20; Isaiah 3:18; Isaiah 7:18; Isaiah 7:20-21; Isaiah 7:23). will I raise up the fallen booth (or hut) of David, and fence up the breaches &c.] The succâh, or “booth,” was a rude hut—properly one made of intertwined branches; and the word is used of a cattle-shed (Genesis 33:17), of the rough tents used by soldiers in war (2 Samuel 11:11), or by watchmen in a vineyard (Isaiah 1:8; Job 27:18), of the “booth” made by Jonah (Amos 4:5), and of the rude temporary huts, constructed of branches of trees, in which the Israelites dwelt during the Feast of Ingathering, or, as it is also called from this circumstance, the ‘Feast of Booths’ (Leviticus 23:40; Leviticus 23:42; Deuteronomy 16:13). The term itself denotes consequently a very humble structure, which here, in addition, is represented as fallen. In the following words the figure of the booth is neglected; the ‘breaches’ being those of a wall or fortress (cf. Amos 4:3; Isaiah 30:13). These expressions are evidently intended to represent the humbled state of the Davidic dynasty; though what the humiliation actually referred to is, is uncertain. According to some, the allusion is to the loss sustained by David’s house through the revolt of the ten tribes[203] according to others, it is to the future ruin of Judah, which it appears from Amos 2:5 (cf. the words of rebuke in Amos 3:1, Amos 6:1) that Amos contemplated; others, again, suppose the reference to be to the actual overthrow of David’s dynasty by the Chaldaeans in 586 b.c., and infer accordingly that Amos 9:11-15 was an addition made to the original prophecy of Amos during (or after) the Babylonian exile. On the whole, the second view seems the best (cf. p. 122 f.). [203] A reference to the blow inflicted upon Judah by Amaziah (2 Kings 14:13 f.) is doubtful, as this must have happened some 30 years previously, and under Uzziah Judah appears to have rapidly recovered itself.ruins] lit. things torn down. The cognate verb (hâras) is often applied to a wall or fortress (e.g. Micah 5:11; Ezekiel 26:12); it is the exact opposite of the following build (see Ezekiel 36:36; Malachi 1:4). as in the days of old] i.e. the age of David and Solomon. The expression used is a relative one, and may denote a period more or less remote according to the context; in Micah 7:14, Isaiah 63:11, for instance, it denotes the age of Moses, while in Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:4 the same word (‘ôlâm), rendered “of old,” denotes merely the beginning of the Babylonian exile, viewed from its close.

Amos 9:12

12. That they may possess the remnant of Edom &c.] i.e. that the empire of David may be restored to its former limits. The allusion is to the nations—the Philistines, Moab, Ammon, Aram of Zobah, Damascus, Edom, &c.—which, though they had been conquered by David (2 Samuel 8, &c.), had afterwards revolted: these, Amos promises, should again be incorporated in the restored empire of David. the remnant of Edom] No doubt Edom is named specially on account of the ancient rivalry subsisting between it and Israel; in the happy future which the prophet here anticipates, he pictures it as reduced to a mere remnant (cf. Amos 1:12; Obadiah 1:18-21). This seems better than to suppose an allusion to recent defeats, whether the victory of Amaziah (2 Kings 14:7),—which, however, must have taken place some 30 years previously,—or the subjugation by Uzziah, which appears to be presupposed by 2 Kings 14:22 (cf. 2 Kings 16:6 R.V. marg.). and all the nations, over whom my name has been called] viz. in token of conquest, or ownership. The reference is to the nations which, as just stated, had been conquered by David: in virtue of their subjugation by him, they had passed under the dominion of Jehovah. The sense of the expression, over whom my name was called, appears clearly from 2 Samuel 12:28, where Joab, while besieging Rabbah of the Ammonites, invites David to come and take it himself “lest I (emph.) take the city, and my name be called over it,” i.e. lest I get the credit of having captured it, and it be counted as my conquest. The phrase expresses thus the fact of ownership—whether acquired by actual conquest or otherwise (cf. Isaiah 4:1). It is used especially of the people of Israel, Jerusalem, or the temple, as owned by Jehovah: see Deuteronomy 28:10; Jeremiah 7:10-11; Jeremiah 7:14; Jeremiah 7:30; Jeremiah 14:9; Jeremiah 15:16 (of Jeremiah himself), Jeremiah 25:29, Jeremiah 32:34, Jeremiah 34:15; 1 Kings 8:43 (= 2 Chronicles 6:33); Isaiah 63:19; 2 Chronicles 7:14; Daniel 9:18-19; and the newly-recovered Hebrew text of Sir 47:18. In A.V., R.V., the phrase is often, unfortunately, represented by the obscure paraphrase, “called by my name”; but the literal rendering, which is both clearer and more forcible than the paraphrase, is sometimes added in the margin of R.V. (e.g. 1 Kings 8:43). that doeth this] An epithet confirmatory of the preceding promise; cf. Jeremiah 33:2. Amos 9:11-12 stands in the LXX. (cod. B) thus: ἐντῇἡμέρᾳἐκείνῃἀναστήσωτὴνσκηνὴνΔαυεὶδτὴνπεπτωκυῖαν, καὶἀνοικοδομήσωτὰπεπτωκότααὐτῆς, καὶτὰκατεσκαμμένα (AbQ* κατεστραμμένα) αὐτῆςἀναστήσω, καὶἀνοικοδομήσωαὐτὴνκαθὼςαἱἡμέραιτοῦαἰῶνος, 12ὅπως (A+ἂν) ἐκζητήσωσινοἱκατάλοιποιτῶνἀνθρώπων (A+τὸνΚύριον), καὶπάντατὰἔθνηἐφʼ ? οὒςἐπικέκληταιτὸὄνομάμουἐπʼ ? αὐτούς, λέγειΚύριοςὁποιῶνταῦτα. In Acts 15:17 the verses are quoted by St James—or by St Luke in his report of St James’ speech—in this form (μετὰταῦταἀναστρέψωκαὶἀνοικοδομήσωτὴνσκηνὴνΔαυεὶδτὴνπεπτωκυῖαν, καὶτὰκατεστραμμένααὐτῆςἀνοικοδομήσω, καὶἀνορθώσωαὐτήν, ὅπωςἂνἐκζητήσωσινοἱκατάλοιποιτῶνἀνθρώπωντὸνΚύριον, καὶπάντατὰἔθνηἐφʼ ? οὒςἐπικέκληταιτὸὄνομάμουἐπʼ ? αὐτούς, λέγειΚύριοςποιῶνταῦταγνωστὰἀπʼ ? αἰῶνος), for the purpose of shewing that God’s having visited the Gentiles “to take out of them a people to his name” was in accordance with the teaching of the prophets. The passage illustrates the freedom which New Testament writers allow themselves in quoting from the Old Testament. Not only are there many minor variations from the text of the LXX.; but in the most important part of the quotation, the rendering adopted implies a reading of the Hebrew text (ΰָ ?γָ ?νμξςοιִ ?γְ ?ψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ωΰψιϊ “that the remnant of men may seek [the Lord],” for μξςοιִ ?ιψְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ΰϊωΰψιϊΰֱ ?γֹ ?ν “that they may inherit the remnant of Edom”), which cannot be right, and can hardly even express a thought implicit in Amos’ words, though it is no doubt one found in other prophets, viz. that the ultimate aim of Israel’s restoration is to exert upon the nations a spiritual influence, and bring them to the knowledge of the true God (cf. Isaiah 55:5). ΤὸνΚύριον (“the Lord”), to which nothing corresponds in the Heb., has been supplied, it will be observed, in order to provide the verb “seek” with an object.

The text of the Vatican MS. of the LXX. (cod. B) is purer and more original than that of the Alexandrian MS. (cod. A): the quotation in the Acts agrees in several particulars with the latter against the former; and it is not improbable that the text of cod. A has been corrected on the basis of the quotation. In Psalms 14 (13) 3, the composite quotation of St Paul (Romans 3:13-18) has found its way even into the text of Cod. B.

Amos 9:13-15

13–15. The prosperity and happiness to be enjoyed by Israel upon its own land in the future.

Amos 9:14

14. To the land thus blessed by nature, Israel shall be restored: it shall rebuild its waste places, and dwell in them securely; it shall also enjoy, without interruption or interference, the varied produce of the soil. I will turn the captivity] The precise sense of the Hebrew expression is disputed; and others—as Ewald, Kuenen, Dillmann (on Job 42:10), Cheyne and Kirkpatrick on Psalms 14:7—prefer to render “turn the fortune (lit. turn the turning) of my people,” i.e. effect a decisive and epoch-making change in its lot. In the present passage, however, even though the latter be the true meaning, the general sense remains the same: for, as Amos pictures the people as exiled (Amos 7:17 &c.), the change of fortune which, upon this view would be predicated in the expression, would of course be a return from captivity. Comp. Hosea 6:11. The promise of restoration from exile (or captivity) is naturally common in the later prophets: for similar promises in earlier prophets, see Hosea 11:10-11. and they shall build waste cities, and inhabit them] waste cities, as Jeremiah 33:10, Isaiah 54:3; cf. Ezekiel 36:35. The similar promise in Isaiah 65:21 may also be compared (“they shall build houses, and inhabit them,”—opposed to Isaiah 65:22 “they shall not build, and another inhabit”). Contrast ch. Amos 5:11; also Deuteronomy 28:30 (“thou shalt build a house, and not inhabit it”), Zephaniah 1:13. and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof] Cf. Isaiah 65:21 (“they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit thereof”); also Ezekiel 28:26. Contrast ch. Amos 4:9, Amos 5:11; also Deuteronomy 28:30; Deuteronomy 28:39; Zephaniah 1:13. and they shall make gardens, and eat the fruit of them] Contrast ch. Amos 4:9.

Amos 9:15

15. Israel will moreover remain permanently settled in its own land. And I will plant them … and they shall no more be pulled up, &c.] Cf. Jeremiah 24:6 (“I will plant them and not pull them up”); Jeremiah 42:10. For similar promises, see Jeremiah 32:41; Ezekiel 34:28; Isaiah 60:21; Joe 3:20; and elsewhere. On the question of the non-fulfilment of such promises, see Riehm, Messianic Prophecy (ed. 2, 1891), pp. 238–268. It is to be remembered (1) that they are conditional upon Israel’s worthiness; (2) that the question forms part of a larger one, viz. the nature and extent of the ideal element in the prophets’ pictures of the future, and the degree to which those pictures were coloured by the national and local limitations peculiar to their religion. Cf. p. 32 f., above, with the passages referred to in the footnotes; and comp. also F.H. Woods, The Hope of Israel (1896), chaps. 4 5 10. thy God] the title, expressive of consolation and affection, as Isaiah 41:10; Isaiah 52:7; Isaiah 54:6; Isaiah 66:9. The restored nation is pictured naturally by the prophet as penitent and reformed (cf. pp. 31 f., 121); hence Jehovah is no longer its foe (Amos 9:4; Amos 9:8), but can acknowledge it again as His own.