Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
AMOS
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: ALM-ANC
del.icio.us it!
|
AMOS . in the See also:Bible, an Israelitish See also:prophet of the 8th See also:century B.C. He was a native of Tekoa, i.e. as most suppose, a See also:place which still bears the same name 6 m. S. of See also:Bethlehem. He was a shepherd, or perhaps a See also:sheep-breeder, but combined this occupation with that of a See also:tender of sycomore See also:figs. It is true, the Tekoa just mentioned lies too high for sycomores; so it has been almost too ingeniously supposed that Amos may have owned a See also:plantation of sycomores in the See also: " No prophet am I; no prophet's son am I; a shepherd am I, and one who tends sycomore-figs. And Yahweh took me from behind the See also:flock; and Yahweh said to me, Go, prophesy against my See also:people Israel." The following words show that a prophet in See also:ancient Israel had the utmost freedom of speech. It was far otherwise in the See also:period of the fall of Judah. (See See also:JEREMIAH.) But what had Amos said that appeared so dangerous to the head priest ? Amaziah summarizes it thus, " See also:Jeroboam shall See also:die by the See also:sword, and Israel shall go away into captivity from his own land " (vii. I1; cf. vii. 9b, v. 27, vi. 7). He omits all the reasons for this stern prophecy. The reasons are that the See also:good old Israelitish virtue of brotherliness is dying away, that oppression and injustice are rampant (ii. 6-8, iii. 9, 10, iv. 1, V. 11, 12, viii. 4-6), and that See also:rites are practised in the name of See also:religion which are abhorrent to Yahweh, because they either have no moral meaning at all, and are See also:mere forms (v. 21-23), or else, judged from Amos's purified point of view, are absolutely immoral (ii. 7; cf. viii. 14). On the details of the captivity Amos preserves a mysterious vagueness. The fact, however, he puts forward with the confidence of one who is intimate with his See also:God (iii. 7), and most probably it was at some See also:great festival that he spoke the words which so perturbed Amaziah. The priest may not indeed himself have believed them, but he probably feared their effect on the moral courage of the people. And it isperhaps not arbitrary to suppose that the splendour of the See also:ritual in Amos's See also:time implies a tremulous anxiety that Israel's seeming prosperity under Jeroboam II. (see See also:JEws) may not be as secure as could be wished. For Amos cannot have been quite alone either in Israel or in Judah; there must have been a little flock of those who See also:felt with Amos that there was small See also:reason indeed to " See also:desire the See also:day of Yahweh " (v. 18; see Harper's See also:note). But why did Amos so emphatically decline to be called a prophet ? A prophet in some true sense he certainly was, a prophet who, within his own range, has not been surpassed. He means this—that he is no mere ecstatic enthusiast or " See also:dervish," whose See also:primary aim is to keep up the warlike spirit of the people, taking for granted that Yahweh is on the people's See also:side, and that he is perfectly See also:free from the taint of selfishness, not having to support himself by his prophesying. He could not indeed tell Amaziah this, but it is nevertheless true that he was the founder, or one of the founders, of a new type of prophet. He was also either the first, or one of the first, to write down, or to get written down, the substance of his spoken prophecies, and perhaps also prophecies which he never delivered at all. This was the consequence of his See also:ill success as a public preacher. The other prophets of the same See also:order may be presumed to have been hardly less unsuccessful. Hence the new phenomenon of written prophecies. The See also:literary skill of Amos leads one to suppose that he had prepared in advance for this, perhaps we. may say, not altogether unfortunate See also:necessity. That there are many hard problems connected with the fascinating See also:book of Amos cannot be denied. The one point on which we have indicated a doubt, viz. as to the situation of Tekoa, ought strictly to be accompanied by others. For instance, how came Amos to See also:transfer himself to northern Israel ? How hard it must have been to obtain a footing there while he was a mere student and observer! And how came he by his wide knowledge of people 'outside the limits of Israel ? The most See also:recent and elaborate commentator even calls him an " ethnologist." And lastly, whence came his mastery of the poetical and literary arts ? Is he really the See also:Columbus of written prophecy ? And behind these questions is the fundamental problem of the See also:text, which has been somewhat too slightly treated. The text of See also:Hosea may be in a much worse See also:condition, but a keen See also:scrutiny discloses many an uncertainty, not to say impossibility, in the traditional See also:form of Amos. That the text has been much adapted and altered is certain; not less obvious are the corruptions due to carelessness and See also:accident. The See also:main divisions of the book are See also:plain, viz. chaps. i.-ii., chaps. iii.-vi., and chaps. vii.-ix. This arrangement, however, is probably not due to Amos himself, or to his immediate disciples, but to some later redactor. A number of passages seem to have been inserted subsequently to the time of Amos, on which see Ency. Bib., " Amos," and the introduction to See also:Robertson See also: Harper's Amos and Hosea (see Hosea) (1905) gives the cream of all the good things that have been said before, with a generally See also:sound See also:judgment; it is addressed to advanced students, and is perhaps less cautious than the two former. The See also:German commentaries on the See also:Minor Prophets by Nowack (2nd ed., 1903) and (especially) See also:Marti (1004) must not, however, be neglected. 'See also:Wellhausen's briefer See also:work (3rd ed., 1898) is especially suggestive for textual See also:criticism. See also:Cheyne's Crilica Biblica (1904), cf. his See also:review of Harper in Hibbert See also:Journal, iii. 824 if., breaks new ground. (T. K. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] AMORY, THOMAS (c. 1691-1788) |
[next] AMOS, SHELDON (1835–1886) |