Amos and Hosea
Amos and Hosea are two prophets to the nation of Isreal. They are the only two writing prophets for the northern kingdom.
Following is a discussion to provide an introduction to Amos and Hosea. The intent is to convey the background, the purpose of the message, and the outcome of each.
AMOS
Eighth-century b.c. writing prophets:
1) Amos
2) Hosea (began ca. 750 b.c.), Amos and Hosea in Israel
3) Isaiah (began ca. 740 b.c.),
4) Micah (began ca. 735 b.c.). Isaiah and Micah ministered in Judah.
Other OT prophets preceded Amos, but they were not preserved in a separate book.
1. The Historical Setting
Uzziah (783 to 742 B.C. was king in Judah
Jeroboam, the son of Jehoash, was king in Israel (786 B.C. to 746 B.C.
Specific date is in reference to “two years before the earthquake.” Perhaps we can narrow the time of Amos’s preaching to sometime in the early 760s.
Some forty years (800 to 760 B.C.) – Assyria’s weak kings left Israel and Judah alone. Egypt’s weak kings posed no threat to Israel and Judah from 850 to 750 B.C..
The preoccupation of Assyria with Urartu, coupled with cooperation between Israel and Judah, provided the environment for these sister kingdoms to expand.Both Israel and Judah enjoyed an extended period of peace and economic prosperity. The economic boom was accompanied by an increase in religious activities. The shrines at Bethel, Dan, Gilgal, and Beer-sheba had constant streams of worshipers bringing growing numbers of sacrificial animals. Amos showed God’s disapproval of such religious activities by announcing God’s judgment upon the religious sites, by giving counsel to stay away from the sites, and by declaring God’s rejection of their religious activities (3:14; 4:4–5; 5:4–5; 5:22–24).
Paradoxically, the period was characterized by moral and spiritual decline and by social upheaval. Israel’s frequent attendance at the shrines to make sacrifices did not result in moral, spiritual, and social uprightness. The rich oppressed the poor, indulged in extravagant lifestyles, denied justice to the oppressed, and engaged in immoral sexual activities (2:6–8; 4:1; 5:11–13). Israel’s moral and spiritual decline, plus the social upheaval brought on by greed, contradicted their accelerated religious activities. Such were the times of Amos’s arrival in Israel with a strong message of judgment from God. Israel’s outward show of devotion to God, contradicted by their moral, spiritual, and social problems, called for a discerning and courageous prophet.
Amos, the Man
1. Amos came from Tekoa (1:1) in Judah, a village ten or eleven miles south of Jerusalem and about eighteen miles west of the Dead Sea.
2. Amos as v1. The Hebrew term used may designate Amos as a sheepbreeder rather than a common shepherd employed by a wealthy owner of the sheep
3. Amos as one who “took care of [bôlēs] sycamore-fig trees.” Bôqēr designates a “herdsman,” and bôlēs refers to one who scrapes or punctures or does something with sycamore-figs. A dresser of sycamore trees would be one to nip the sycamore fruit in order to hasten ripening.
4. Amos also refused the term “prophet” (nābî) as an appropriate description of his role. He claimed no special authority associated with traditional titles when Amaziah ordered him out of Bethel (7:12–13). Instead, he gave his testimony of bivocational employment as “a herdsman and a dresser of sycamore trees” (7:14) when the Lord ordered him to prophesy to Israel (7:15). He came to Bethel not as a representative of one of the prophetical guilds but as a layman under divine order to perform the function of a prophet.
Amos knew the history of Israel and the history of the nations around Israel. He knew Israelite politics, society, and religion. He had enough courage to confront those who oppressed the poor, religious leaders such as Amaziah, and greedy landgrabbers and merchants. His strong sense of the Lord’s call to prophesy was the enabling force of his ministry (7:15). Such a sense of call has continued to be the authority and motivation for service to the Lord.
The Book of Amos has two parts: words (chaps. 1–6) and visions (chaps. 7–9). “Words of Amos” and “what he saw” in the title verse (1:1) reveal these two parts.
Five distinct types of material make up the book: (1) oracles (or sayings) spoken by Amos, (2) vision-reports, (3) a third-person narrative reporting Amaziah’s opposition to Amos, (4) three stanzas of an old hymn, and (5) the title.
In the midst of God’s judgment there is always the prophetic word of hope as evidenced by the other classical prophets.
Amos went to Israel under divine appointment to bear strong messages of judgment and hope.
Note the speech forms found in the book:
1. graded numerical sayings: “for three sins of …, even for four” (e.g., 1:3, 6, 9);
2. participial style: “you women who oppress” (4:1);
3. quotation of the audience: “and say to your husbands, ‘Bring us some drinks’ ” (4:1);
4. climactic patterns (1:3–2:16; 4:6–12);
5. woe oracles (5:18–20; 6:1–7); and
6. wordplays: “a basket of ripe fruit” in 5:5b and “the time is ripe” in 8:1–3.
Additional features of language use in Amos include
Ø oath formula (4:2; 6:8; 8:7);
Ø antithesis (5:4–5);
Ø richness of imagery (2:13);
Ø disputation (3:3–8; 9:7–10); and
Ø curse formula (7:17).
These features of language give convincing evidence that Amos was familiar with the best wisdom, priestly, and prophetic forms of rhetoric. Such use of rhetorical forms must have enhanced the power and attractiveness of his verbal presentations as it does his literary work. The first audiences of the spoken and written messages of the prophet must have resonated readily with his rhetorical forms typically used by wisdom teachers, priests, and prophets. The book offers a striking display of language use.
The Message of Amos
Amos testified that the Lord took him from tending the flock and said to him, “Go, prophesy to my people Israel” (7:15). His oracles and vision-reports give the contents of his message, a message from God to Israel. The sovereign Lord commissioned Amos to bear his message of judgment upon Israel, a judgment so destructive the nation would not survive. Israel’s sin against God caused God’s judgment against Israel. The coming day of the Lord would be a day of darkness and destruction, not light and salvation for “the sinful kingdom” (9:8). Some of “the house of Jacob,” however, would survive the judgment of God and form the nucleus of a restored, blessed, and secure future Israel (9:11–15).
The Sovereignty of the Lord
The Lord’s sovereignty extended over Amos, Judah, Israel, the nations, and all creation. So strong was the Lord’s call of Amos that Amos felt he had no option but to go to Israel with the message of God (3:8b). As sovereign over his own people (Judah and Israel), the Lord called them to account for their rebellion (2:4–16). His sovereignty extended over foreign nations, even though they expressed allegiance to other gods (1:3–2:3). They had to answer to the Lord for their inhumanity.
The hymns in Amos picture the Lord as creator and controller of the universe (4:13; 5:8–9; 9:5–6). His sovereignty was and is all-encompassing. God has not relinquished his control over the universe to any other entity, authority, or power. He is sovereign over all people.
Amos lists their sins and indicted various segments of the population and they would not survive the judgment of God:
a. greedy land-grabbers (2:6);
b. the rich (3:10, 15; 6:4–6);
c. the women of Samaria (4:1);
d. religious frauds (4:4–5; 5:4–7, 21–23);
e. the merchants (8:4–6); and
f. those responsible for injustice in the courts (2:7; 5:7, 10, 12; 6:12).
God’s Judgment brings an end to Israel’s as a nation and for their sin. Take note that Israel’s privileged relationship as people of God did not shield them from the judgment of God.
We all face a judgment day: “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad” (2 Cor 5:10). All nations and all people face a day of accounting to God for their sin, and “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23).
Today we need to make sure we do not hold to a mi misconception of not recognizing the Lord in the Old Testament. Back then the popular opinion among the people was that the day of the Lord would be a day of “light,” or salvation. Amos said it would be a day of “darkness,” or defeat.
Ironically, the people longed for the day to come. Amos said that day of darkness was coming indeed and that it would be inescapable. YET – the final picture in the book is of a day in the future when the Lord’s intervention would bring restoration, plenty, and peace to his people (9:11–15).
In the larger context the hope extended by Amos for Israel’s future restoration is only for a remnant of the nation. The end of Israel came at the hands of the Assyrians (722 b.c.). The end of Judah came at the hands of the Babylonians (586 b.c.). But survival of remnants of both nations, reunion of the people, and restoration to the land also occurred near the end of the sixth century and into the fifth century b.c. Later, James asserted that God was still fulfilling the prophecy of Amos 9:11–15, accounting for the success of the early church in reaching Gentiles for the kingdom of God (Acts 15:12–21).
Complete fulfillment of Amos 9:11–15 may be reserved for some “day” in the distant future. Interpreters differ on what exactly the prophecy projects – while the words may be variously interpreted, one thing is certain: restoration comes only from God, not from any human endeavor (Amos 9:14–15).
The covenantal stipulations required loyalty to God and love toward one’s fellowman.Yet the idolatrous worship of their pagan neighbors had infiltrated the two kingdoms, producing a strange syncretistic worship.
Not only did the people disobey by worshiping idols, but they also violated the social legislation of the covenant.Amos is particularly vehement in denouncing the lack of social concern in his time. Archaeology has illuminated this period through a number of discoveries
The cult of Baal was primarily a fertility cult. It involved ritual prostitution as a means of exciting the lusty Baal, who was worshiped as the source of fecundity.
Unbridled lust characterized the Canaanite observances. The intrusion of similar observances into Israel and Judah could lead only to a rending of the social fabric. The ethical concerns of the law were no longer necessary in a cult that required only external ritual.
Central in Amos’s teaching about God is his divine sovereignty. Yahweh is the God of history. He effects the migrations of peoples (9:7) and controls the orderly progression of natural phenomena (4:13; 5:8). He is in no way a mere automaton controlled by the religious rituals of his creatures. Yet within that sovereign domain, mankind has freedom to bow in submission to Yahweh or to reject him.
Amos affirmed the historical election of Israel (3:2).Their election alone did not guarantee national blessing, for the sovereign Lord had promised that they would be his “treasured possession” if they obeyed him and kept his covenant (Exod 19:5). Amos, more than any other prophet, urged the responsibility of elective privilege.
Another day is coming, however, when hope will shine with glorious promise(9:13–15). The Davidic promise will be realized in the restoration of David’s kingdom, and Jews and Gentiles will be united in the kingdom of David’s greater Son.
Hosea
Hosea, prophet to the northern kingdom of Israel, ministered in the stirring days just preceding the Fall of Assyria. When he began his work, one would not have thought the end was near as prosperity was great in the land. Because there had been peace for many years, and with it had come economic prosperity. The land was again producing abundantly and many people were becoming wealthy. Luxuries had once more become common. Building activity was flourishing on every hand (Hos 8:14), and this led to a widespread feeling of pride (Amos 3:15; 5:11; Isa 9:10).
Social and moral conditions developed that were wrong and degrading. Side by side with wealth, extreme poverty existed. Through dishonest gain and false balances, the strong took advantage of the weak (Hos 12:7; Isa 5:8; Amos 8:5–6). Those who had wealth felt free to oppress the orphans and widows, and even to buy and sell the destitute on the public markets (Amos 8:4, 8). Justice seemed at a premium, and the courts apparently did little to help.
Amos had preceded Hosea in preaching against this idolatry and sin, but the people had clearly paid little attention.Now it was Hosea’s turn, and the fact that Amos had not met with greater success did not make Hosea’s task any easier. Yet he went on with it courageously and spoke out strongly against the evils of the day. He also warned of ruin and disaster if his message was not heeded.
The central thought of Hosea concerns God’s covenant with Israel that the people had broken.The covenant had been made at Mount Sinai in the wilderness, at which time God found the people like “grapes in the desert” and “early fruit on the fig tree” (9:10). God “loved” the people and called them his “son” (11:1; cf. Exod 4:22). Through the passing years, however, they had wandered away from God, and the more he had called after them, the further they went from him (11:2). They fell into deep sin, breaking the covenant so graciously made with them.
Hosea repeatedly described this sin, committed by both people (4:1–2, 9–19; 6:4–11; et al.) and religious leaders (4:5–10). Because Israel’s sin constituted the breaking of the covenant, Hosea gave more attention to this matter than any other.
Along with these descriptions, however, he told also of God’s love and patience with Israel in her sin (11:1–4; 14:1–9) in wanting Israel to return to him.
Hosea employed the forceful illustration of the unhappy marriage relationship he experienced with his own wife, Gomer(1:2–3), to impress these truths on the minds of his readers. She proved unfaithful to him, and he told Israel that the people had been unfaithful to God. Hosea’s taking Gomer back after she had left him (3:1) further parallels God’s frequent taking Israel back after her many occasions of waywardness.
Hosea not only described Israel’s sin but also warned of the people’s coming punishment. Israel’s reprimand for breaking God’s covenant was long deserved, but he had thus far been patient.
The prophet included a note of joy in this otherwise somber picture. Israel’s future punishment would not spell the end; it would be followed by a glad time of restoration.Hosea characterized this time as one of true repentance on the part of the people (6:1–3) and of rich blessing at the hand of God. The people would be “like the sand on the seashore, which cannot be measured or counted,” and would be called “sons of the living God” (1:10). At the time God would “speak tenderly” to the nation and “give her back her vineyards,” she would “sing as in the days of her youth, as in the day she came up out of Egypt” (2:14–15).
Hosea presents the apostasy of Israel under the metaphor of an unfaithful wife.
Israel the wayward wife is the leadership, institutions, and culture of Israel.
· Hosea presents the apostasy of Israel under the metaphor of an unfaithful wife.
· Three children who were themselves signs and symbols to Israel.
· Israel the wayward wife is the leadership, institutions, and culture of Israel.
· The children are the ordinary men and women who are trained and nurtured in that culture.
Mother Israel is the shrines and sacrifices, the sacred blessings, the royal symbols and trappings, the armies, and the official teachings that are passed from generation to generation.
· Members of the ruling class who shape, direct, and exploit the people.
· Mother Israel is that which gives the people their identity.
· She is the institution that forms every Israelite generation.
The children, again, are the common people.
· They are the farmers who want good crops, the mothers who want many children, and the common folk who want security and divine blessing.
· Mother Israel has abandoned Yahweh, her husband. She has embraced a new lover, Baal, because he claims to be able to enrich her with jewels and clothe her in the finest materials.
o She has also pursued other lovers—nations who can supposedly protect her and enrich her with trade.
o Mother Israel has taught her children to serve Baal at the shrines. In doing this, she does not imagine that she has broken her marriage vows but supposes that she is faithful to the real meaning of those vows.
o Looking at the bulls of the shrines, she declares, “These are your gods, who brought you out of Egypt!” (cf. Exod 32:4).
The children have followed their mother.
· Superstitious and fearful while at the same time captivated by that alluring benefit of Baalism, the cult prostitute, they know nothing of their father, Yahweh.
o They are a lost generation, the children of Baal.
o They possess none of the three basic qualities that should mark the chosen people: integrity, compassion, and the knowledge of God.
o Their only hope of salvation is to turn from Mother Israel and go back to the one real Father, Yahweh.
One could look at today and say that the nature of human institutions and of humans themselves has changed very little over the last three millennia.
Hosea, having been commanded to marry an immoral woman, took Gomer as his wife. After some time and the birth of three children, she abandoned him for other lovers.
a. Then apparently she fell into destitution.
b. Again at God’s direction Hosea went after her and found her, redeemed her (perhaps from slavery), and took her home.
This considered as another example of a prophetic “speech-act” in which the prophet does something strange or shocking to carry home his message.
A map of the land in that day:
