Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

Vol 38.1 (2013): 81-108

The Author(s), 2013. Reprints and Permissions:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0309089213492812
http://JSOT.sagepub.com

The Hymn of Amos:

An Ancient Flood Narrative*

GAVIN COX
26 The Firs Park, Bakers Hill, Exeter, Devon EX2 9TD

Abstract
A comparison of Amos with Sumerian City-Lament (SCL) reveals that SCL was likely
used as the literary template for Amos prophecy. Amos also contains references to the
ood, used as a covenant-curse to warn Israel of her treaty violations. This article
compares these ood passages, 4.13; 5.8+9; 8.8; 9.5+6, (described by scholars as
hymnic), with SCL, Genesis ood account, and Job 9.5-10, a similar ood-like hymn,
in order to determine common vocabulary and themes. Analyzing the Amos hymns
vocabulary roots reveals an ancient narrative source. Exploration of the passages literary
connections to Amos in terms of a ood covenant-curse, demonstrates why such
literature was utilized. This article also discusses a new proposal that Amos hymn should
be extended to incorporate a fragment at 7.4.

Keywords: Ancient Near East, covenant treaty-curse, ood, hapax legomenon, MT, LXX,
seismic theophany, Sumerian City-Lament, ww-consecutive.

* I gratefully acknowledge the kind help and guidance of Drs Eldon Clem and David
Friedman.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

82 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

1. Introduction
Amos of Tekoa, Israels rst writing prophet (c. 750 BCE), erupts onto
the pages of biblical history, prophesying against Israel, Judah and
surrounding nations, calling for repentance, two years before the
earthquake struck (1.1), thus authenticating Amos message.1 Amos
earthquake became synchronous with the introduction of seismic
theophany imagery into Hebrew literature, with the appearance of the
Day of the Lord eschatological motif2
Fresh insights have been gained from studying Sumerian City-Laments
(SCLs) and their relation to the writing prophets.3 A comparison of Amos
with SCL reveals it was probably utilized as a literary template. Amos
also illustrated his prophecy by quoting passages describing the ood, in
order to warn Israel of the covenant-curses resulting from treaty viola-
tions. I offer a new proposal that a fragment of this hymn also occurs at
7.4. I present my translation of Amos hymn below:4
4.13 a Lo! Behold!
b He formed mountains,
c He created wind,
d He declared Adams thoughts,
e Making dawn into darkness.
f He trod down the high-places of the earth;
g [YHWH] elh ebt em!
5.8 a He formed Kima and Kesil;
b And overthrew morning into the shadow of death,
c Making day dark as night.
d He called for the waters of the ocean,
e And poured them out upon the face of the earth;
f [YHWH] em!

1. S.M. Paul, A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Hermeneia; Minneapolis:

Augsburg Fortress, 1991), p. 36.
2. S. Austin, G.W. Franz, and E.G. Frost, Amos Earthquake: An Extraordinary
Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C., International Geology Review 42.7 (2000),
pp. 657-71 (657).
3. D.R. Hillers, Lamentations (AB, 7A; New York: Doubleday, 2nd edn, 1992); F.W.
Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion: A Study of the City-Lament Genre in the
Hebrew Bible (Rome: Editrice Ponticio Istituto Biblico, 1993); D.L. Petter, The Book of
Ezekiel: Patterned after a Mesopotamian City Lament? (unpublished PhD dissertation,
University of Toronto, 2009); L.I. Li-Chiou, Semerian City-Laments and Lamentations in
the Hebrew Bible (unpublished MA dissertation, Boston University, 2012); J. Radine,
The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010); T.F. McDaniel,
The Alleged Sumerian Inuence upon Lamentations, VT 18 (1968), pp. 198-209.
4. All Hebrew denitions and reference numbers are taken from BDB.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 83

5.9 a Flashing forth devastation upon the strong,

b Devastating their defenses.
7.4 a Lo Behold!
b adny [YHWH]
c Called for judgment by re,
d Which consumed the Great Deep,
e And consumed its portion.
8.8 a Did not the earth quake for this?
b And all its inhabitants lament?
c All things arose like the light,
d And all was expelled, permeated and subsided,
e Like the River of Misrayim.
9.5 a adny [YHWH] ebt!
b He struck the earth and it melted,
c And all its inhabitants lamented;
d Everything arose like the River,
e And subsided like the River of Misrayim.
9.6 a He built ascending-ascents into heaven,
b And plumes from beneath earths foundations.
c He called for the waters of the ocean,
d And poured them out upon the face of the earth;
e [YHWH] em!

2. Amos Contains Hymnic Material

Criticisms focusing on these verses differences in style compared to
Amos have largely been settled by recognizing they possess participles
characteristic of hymnic measure.5 Scholarly opinions are diverse,
arguing that these verses could represent two or three hymns, or one
hymn having two to four different strophes. However, due to similarities
of the verses participles, and given that 9.6 repeats 5.8, one is forced to
think in terms of one hymn, due to shared formal characteristics and
themes.6 In what follows I will build a new case that 7.4 contains a hymn
fragment.

5. J.D.W. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, JNES 15 (1956),
pp. 33-39 (33).
6. H.W. Wolff, Joel und Amos (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977),
p. 215.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

84 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

Some scholars reason Amos himself composed the hymn because its
verses connect to their contexts so closely.7 Others believe Amos quoted
verses from a familiar but older hymn.8 Gaster clearly stated Amos
embodied quotations from an ancient poem.9

3. Amos vs. SCL

A number of scholars have concluded Amos is pervaded by City-
Lament motifs, a key to understanding the text.10 Five Laments (Ur;
Sumer and Ur; Nippur; Uruk; and Eridu) dating from Ur III, have been
translated, describing the destruction of Sumerian cities and temples.
Throughout these Mesopotamian laments the destructive agent par
excellence is the ood of Enlil.11 D. Hillers compared Lamentations and
Amos 5 with SCL, concluding Amos probably drew upon SCL: books
are made out of other books, and, to the extent that this maxim is true,
biblical books are no exception.12
Dobbs-Alsopp concluded that SCL inuenced Jeremiahs Lamenta-
tions, that all Old Testament writing prophets would seem to be estab-
lished,13 and that a native Israelite city-lament existed, where Israelite
scribes included techniques from the dominant Assyrians in their
education.14
Radine thoroughly compared Amos with SCL,15 concluding, the
Sumerian Curse of Agad (CA) has numerous similarities to both the
literary-predictive texts and to the central body of the book of Amos.16
Radine suggested Amos and the writing prophets utilized lament themes,

7. T.E. McComiskey, The Hymnic Elements of the Prophecy of Amos: A Study of

Form Critical Methodology, JETS 30 (1987), pp. 139-57 (156).
8. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 35.
9. T.H. Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, Journal of the
Manchester Egyptian and Oriental Society 19 (1935), pp. 23-26 (23).
10. Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, pp. 140-41.
11. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, pp. 57-58; Radine, The Book of Amos
in Emergent Judah, pp. 144-46.
12. Hillers, Lamentations, p. 33.
13. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 156.
14. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, pp. 143-46.
15. Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, pp. 142-43. Lament for Sumer and
Ur (LSUr) 31-37, 71, 153, 184, 446; cf. exile themes in Amos 4.2-3; 5.5, 27; 6.7; 7.17;
9.4).
16. Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, p. 158.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 85

which traced back to Mesopotamian traditions. Gwaltney argued for a

direct connection, features of which were adapted for monotheistic
theology.17
Green pointed out SCL displays two complimentary facets: Sumers
destruction and celebration of the cities restoration and return of their
gods.18 Lamentation over the Destruction of Nippur contains clear
examples of the citys restoration.19 I note Amos 9.8-15 reveals striking
parallels with Uruk Laments (UrL) restoration passage.20
Amos 9.8-15 has been criticized as secondary by the overwhelming
majority of modern commentators,21 being viewed as a late insertion
contradicting and canceling Amos prophecy.22 However, hoped-for
restoration was essential to SCL, which evidence reveals Amos used as
the literary template for his prophecy of Israels destruction and restora-
tion, thereby making redaction theories of 9.8-15s secondary insertion,
invalid.
In particular Amos hymn is strikingly reminiscent of Lament for
Sumer and Ur (LSUr) 72-84:23
On that day, Enlil brought the Guti out from the mountains.
Their coming was the ood of Enlil that cannot be withstood,
The great storm of the plain lled the plain, it went before them,
The wide plain was destroyed, no one passed by there
On that day, heaven rumbled, earth trembled, the storm never slept,
The heavens were darkened, they were covered by a shadow
The sun lay down at the horizon, the dust passed over the mountains,
The moon lay at the zenith, the people were afraid.

I present below my thematic comparison between Amos and Jobs

hymns versus SCL:

17. Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, p. 151.

18. M.W. Green, The Uruk Lament, JAOS 104 (1984), pp. 253-79 (253).
19. S.N. Kramer, The Lamentation over the Destruction of Nippur, Acta
Sumerologica 13 (1991), pp. 1-26 (20-23, 25). See 8th Kirugu, lines 248-99.
20. Green, The Uruk Lament, pp. 275-76. UrL-12.12; UrL-12.13 (cf. 9.13)owing
wine; abundant produce; UrL-12.6-7 (cf. 9.11)exalted temple; restored sacrices;
UrL-12.29-30 (cf. 9.13-15)Edenic restoration.
21. E. Hammershaimb, The Book of Amos: A Commentary (Oxford: Basil Blackwell,
1970), p. 135.
22. F.I. Andersen and D.N. Freedman, Amos: A New Translation with Introduction
and Commentary (AB, 24A; New York: Doubleday, 1989), pp. 863-64.
23. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 58.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

86 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

Amos Phrase/Vocabulary SCL Phrase/Vocabulary

4.13b Former of mountains ()JC9) K.323824 The word [of Enlil] shattered the
mountain (kr)
5.8b And overthrew morning into LSUr25 The heavens were darkened, they
the shadow of death 72-84 were covered by a shadow
5.8c Making day dark ((JI9) as UL That One turned pitch black
night 1.12 (h-i); as at night
5.9a+b Flashing forth (8J=3>9) UL 1.14 That One lled (the world) with
devastation upon the LSUr its roar (balag) The storm was
strong Devastating their 72-84 a harrow coming from above, the
defenses city struck by a pickaxe
7.4d+e consumed the Great Deep, LSUr The great storm of the plain went
and consumed its portion 72-84 before them. The wide plain was
(plain) destroyed
8.8d+e Aroseand subsided as the UL 3.3 a devastating deluge
9.5d+e Nile 3.15a makes the Tigris and Euphrates
quaver
9.5c And all its inhabitants LSUr the people were afraid
lamented 72-84
9.5d Everything arose as the UL 5.20 Subir, rising up like a swelling
River oodwave
9.6a He built ascending-ascents UL 5.7 rose up (il) to heavenheaven
(HEH=>) into heaven perished
Job
9.5 He removes the mountains UL At its reverberation the mountain
(DJC9) 3.16b (hur) peaks shall be uprooted
9.6 shakes the earthpillars UL it shall make the mountains
tremble 3.15b; 17 rumble. Sumer and Akkad shall
shiver

Themes of ood, re, darkness and earthquake are shared between Amos
and Jobs hymns versus SCL. However, SCL contains much divergent
material. The question of shared vocabulary should be quantied. To
investigate, I compared Amos and Jobs hymn vocabulary roots to
standard ancient Near Eastern sources,26 to establish any commonalities.

24. S. Langdon, Babylonian Liturgies (Paris: Librairie Paul Geuthner, 1913), pp. 1-
274, see Litany of Nebo, a striking earthquake hymn (p. 65). See also Green, The Uruk
Lament, pp. 265-66, 270, 273-75.
25. Dobbs-Allsop, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 58.
26. T.M. Roth (ed.), The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the Univer-
sity of Chicago, IXXI (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 19562010) (CAD); G. del
Olmo Lete and G.J. Sanmartn, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 87

My table below presents common parallel roots of both hymns as %min

max range:27

Amos Hymn %Akkadian %Babylonian %Sumerian %Ugaritic

4.13 31-37 47 16 63
5.8 31-38 56 19 69
5.9 0 80 40 80
7.4 33-42 33-42 33-42 75-83
8.8 79 64 50 86
9.5 53 27 33 73
9.6 54-69 46 15 85
% 35-40 48-49 28-29 74-76

Job Hymn %Akkadian %Babylonian %Sumerian %Ugaritic

9.5 67-83 67-83 33 50-83
9.6 20 40 40 50-83
9.7 71 71 43 71
9.8 17-33 33 0 83
9.9 20 40 60 60
% 41-48 52-55 34 66-79

Jefferson discussed Psalm 110, which has 71% of its vocabulary

paralleled by Ugaritic words. Within the Psalter only four other psalms
have such high percentage Ugaritic vocabulary: Psalms 18, 29 and 93,
which all mention the oodand Psalm 68.28 Jefferson concluded such
strong Canaanite colouring supports the view that Psalm 110 is primi-
tive and pre-Exilic in date.29 I hold this view for Amos and Jobs hymns.
Both hymns utilize a striking number of rare verbs (possibly hapax
legomena [HLs]), summarized below.30

Tradition, I and II (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2003); J.A. Halloran, Sumerian Lexicon Version 3.0
(http://www.sumerian.org/sumerlex.htm, 2009); S. Tinney, Pennsylvania Sumerian
Dictionary (http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/, 2006).
27. Further work could reveal more ancient Near Eastern connections. A %minmax
range reects any uncertainties of comparison. (My basic vocabulary analysis did not
include grammatical particles, or comparisons of grammatical constructions.)
28. H.G. Jefferson, Is Psalm 110 Canaanite?, JBL 73 (1954), pp. 152-56. Ps. 68,
which is noted for its Ugaritic parallels, also contains strong theophanic imagery
(p. 154).
29. Jefferson, Is Psalm 110 Canaanite?, p. 153.
30. BibleWorks8.0 morphological searches suggests (but does not prove) these HLs.
Researchers may feel free to amend my list. I restricted by search to Job 9.5-9.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

88 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

(BDB#) HL Amos Job Akkadian Babylonian Sumerian Ugaritic

(102) HE58H 9.6 guddu gud /-g-d/ (?)
(7533) BJE>9 9.5 qat etqu /-t-q/
(1234)8J=3>9 5.9 bala bal zalag /p-l-g/

(1951) 9C8?H 8.8 rahu rsu rii /g-r-/

(2453) )<A9(A9H 5.8 9.5 abku km /h-p-k/
(3549)(JI9 5.8 hei
(3468) DCI= 9.7 harsu arsu r
(5091)8H?9 9.5 mug (?)
(7725) *H4=AEJ 9.6 buluh pln (?)
(8891)K8CE 8.8 rg /r-/
(10299) 9B?H 8.8 aia  a-- qh
(10312) 9B?H, 8.8; 9.5 a q (?) aqal esad q
9BH
(9424) HI 4.13 se

The following table expresses these rare verbs as % parallel foreign roots:

Hymn ( HLs) %Akkadian %Babylonian %Sumerian %Ugaritic

Amos (12) 33-50 92 58-67 58-67
Job (4) 50 75 50 75-100

The numbers suggest ancient source(s), and invite investigations into the
passages redaction history.

4. Discussion of Rare Verbs within Amos Hymn

Rare verbs (possibly HLs) appear clustered within Amos hymn. I briey
discuss below some of the more interesting cases, giving attention to their
ancient Near Eastern origins, and the issues I consider for my hymn trans-
lation.

5.9a: 8J=3>9 (BDB-1234), ashing forth, is equivalent to bala,

Sumerian for drum.31 The Sumerian Balag-Laments (accompanied by
thunderous drum music) describe the destruction of cities by ood,
thunder and invasion.32

31. J.S. Cooper, Genre, Gender and the Sumerian Lamentation, JCS 58 (2006),
pp. 39-47 (41 n. 6); R.J. Dumbrill, The Archaeomusicology of the Ancient Near East
(Victoria, BC: Trafford, 2005), pp. 224-26.
32. J.A. Black, Eme-Sal Cult Songs and Prayers, Aula Orientalis 9.1 (1991), pp. 23-
36 (28).

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 89

8.8d: this text contains three possible HLs, sharing ancient parallel roots.
9C8?H (BDB-1951), cast out, drive out, expelled (Ugaritic
/g-r-/; Sumerian rii). This verb describes movement away from an
original position/state.
 9B?H (BDB-10299), give drink, be irrigated (Ugaritic qh; Sumerian
a--, aia; Old Babylonian/Akkadian a q). This verb is remini-
scent of Gen. 2.6, a mist went up from the earth and watered/irrigated the
whole face of the ground. I therefore translate 9B?H as permeation.
 9B?H (BDB-10312), sink down (Ugaritic q; Sumerian esad; Old
Babylonian aqalu). In particular the Babylonian is said of rainfall or
oodwater.33 I translate 9B?H as subsided, which may be applied to
both ood waters and light that decreases in strength.

9.6a: HJEH=> HEH=> (four times) (BDB-7097), step/stair/ascent (cf.
Ezek. 40.6). Paas recognized Egyptian templethrone allusions,34 I sug-
gest nilometer allusions, where Nile oods were measured by ascending
steps.35 9.6 therefore describes ocean waters ascending to the heavens; an
immeasurable ood, upon which YHWH ascended and sat enthroned (cf.
Ps. 29.1-11).
Smith comments on Egyptian Demotic texts which describe massive
Nile inundations ascending up to the sky, and inundating mountains and
hills. Such Nile oods were theologically compared to the Primeval Ocean
(Nun) covering the earth at creation. Such texts bear striking resemblance
to the Amos hymn, so lending an authentic ancient Egyptian inuence.36

9.6b: HE58H (BDB-102), band/thong. Using active imagery, the lan-

guage of 9.6a+b describes ascent into the sky, then descent back to earth.
HE58 includes ideas of band, or bunch,37 and troop (ghting men,
plural). HE58 shares its root with (BDB-1650) grow up, become great,
also (BDB-1662) tower. I have translated HE58H as plumes, to describe
volcanic plume imagery. Sumerian and Babylonian words guddu, sukud,
zugud include ideas of military troop, height, and possibly cauldron.

33. CAD, vol. 17, , II, p. 12.

34. S. Paas, He Who Builds His Stairs into Heaven, UF 25 (1993), pp. 319-25.
35. B. Bell, The Oldest Records of the Nile Floods, Geographical Journal 136
(1970), pp. 569-73 (572). Measurements are known from the First Dynasty.
36. M. Smith, On the Primaeval Ocean. The Carlsberg Papyri 5 (Denmark: Museum
Tuscalanum Press, 2002). Smith discusses the rising of the Nile in the Berlin hymn to
Ptah, which states: [Ptah] the one who makes the Primaeval Ocean rise up to the sky, who
causes water to come upon the mountains (pp. 116-17).
37. The phrase bunch of hyssop describes a shape (cf. Exod. 12.22).

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

90 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

5. Extents of Amos Hymn Fragments

a. General Comments on Extents
For these verses to be considered as separate literary units, their extents
within Amos must be established. Scholars generally regard the specied
verses as the textual limits of the fragments. The MT preserves the D
division marker at 4.13; 5.7; 8.8, indicating their strophic limits. Watts
maintained the status quo with 8.8; 9.5-6, but attempted to connect 5.6+7
with 5.8, and 4.12c with 4.13. Is Wattss analysis correct? Watts
described Amos redaction as cumbersome, revealing it was not a single
composition, but 4.12c+13 appears to be a quotation which was used to
support the prophets point.38
I agree the supporting quotation as a whole is not a single composi-
tion, but 4.12c-13s transition is not cumbersome; rather, it is highly
signicant when seen in covenant-treaty terms. 4.12cs repetition of thus
will I do to you doubly emphasizes Lev. 26.16, I also will do this to
you. Israel faces the results of her treaty violations, and is commanded,
Prepare to meet your God (cf. Exod. 19.15-17). It has been rightly
observed that the hymn proper starts at 4.13a, Lo! Behold!39 Watts
extends the limits of 5.8 to include 5.6-7, preferring the more hymnic
style of LXX over MT.40
The majority of scholars follow MT, maintaining the strophes limits
as 5.8-9. Is the LXX to be preferred over MT in Amos? Cramer rejected
Wattss LXX reading.41 Gelston noted unusual concentrations of 23 LXX
discrepancies (including the hymn verses) compared to MT Amos.42 Arieti
discusses general LXX vocabulary mistakes, and loss of depth during
translation.43 Therefore Wattss reliance upon LXX, connecting 4.12c with
4.13 and 5.6-7 with 5.8, should be rejected. The localized names Israel
(4.12c), Joseph, and Bethel (5.6) should not be included in a pre-
Israelite hymn.

38. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 33.

39. McComiskey, The Hymnic Elements of the Prophecy of Amos, p. 147.
40. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 35.
41. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 35 n. 24. Watts admits
Cramer rejects the LXX reading, even though v. 7 seems hymnic in the LXX.
42. A. Gelston, Some Hebrew Misreadings in the Septuagint of Amos, VT 52
(2002), pp. 493-500 (495, 500).
43. J.A. Arieti, The Vocabulary of Septuagint Amos, JBL 93 (1974), pp. 338-47
(340, 346).

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 91

There is general agreement that a divine name closed each verse.44 The
clause YHWH em connects 4.13 to 5.8-9 with 9.5-6, making the phrase
important for a study of the relationships between the [verses].45

b. Amos 7.4A Vision Report/Hymn Fragment

Paas recognized striking relationships between Amos hymn and vision
reports, showing Amos structured his book around both,46 thereby linking
9.5bs melting earth with 7.4s ery vision. Szab recognized ood tradi-
tions within Amos hymn and 7.4s vision report.47 I therefore propose 7.4
utilizes a hymn fragment starting at Lo! Behold! and terminating at 7.5.
Presented below are common themes between Amos hymn and 7.4.

Amos Vision Report Amos Hymn Fragments

7.4b Lo! Behold! (9?9H) 4.13a Lo! Behold! (9?9J<)
7.4b adny [YHWH] 9.5a adny [YHWH] ebt
7.4c 33C=CB 9.6c )J9J>=CB9
7.4c (called for judgment by re) 9.6c (called for ocean waters)
7.4d Great Deep 9.6b beneath earths foundations
7.4e consumed its portion 9.5b struckearth and it melted

Strong parallel themes, vocabulary and emphasized divine names are

common to Amos vision report and hymn fragments, indicating co-
dependency.

6. Amos Hymn: Creation or De-creation?

Some notable scholars have viewed the hymn fragments as praise
doxologies to YHWH as Creator.48 I will demonstrate these passages
praise YHWHs judgments as De-creator. When scholars maintain a
creation-praise doxology perspective, the verses perceived positions

44. Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 215: formal characteristics of these passages especially
stand outthe closure of several cola with Yahweh (God of Hosts) is his name .
45. C.I.K. Story, Amos. Prophet of Praise, VT 30 (1980), pp. 67-80 (69).
46. S. Paas, Seeing and Singing: Visions and Hymns in the Book of Amos, VT 52
(2002), pp. 253-74 (274).
47. A. Szab, Textual Problems in Amos and Hosea, VT 25 (1975), pp. 500-24
(504).
48. John Calvin, Commentary on Joel, Amos, Obadiah (Grand Rapids: Christian
Classics Ethereal Library, n.d.), pp. 259, 395-96; Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the
Book of Amos, p. 39; Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, p. 23;
Story, Amos: Prophet of Praise, p. 72.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

92 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

within Amos automatically appear to them as contextually incomplete

obtrusive, misplaced, later insertions, or replacement verses49so inviting
a myriad theories of redaction.50 Phrases pivotal to my argument are
analyzed below to show the difference in interpretive results.
Some scholars believe 5.8; 9.5d-6 describe natural hydrologic cycles
and fertilization of the earth, viewing these verses as a seasonal harvest
hymn. Watts and Gaster rely heavily upon reconstructing MT to t their
paradigm. Seasonal interpretations drive Wattss translation of 9.5-6 by
making slight orthographical change[s]. Watts replaces swelling and
subsiding with reservoirs and irrigate.51 The context is the land rising
up and down, like the Nile, an illustration of seismic theophany. Such
reinterpretations ignore Amos earthquake context, where the verb C9
(1.1LXX TFJTNPV) depicts cosmic upheaval52 (cf. K8C, 8.8a). The
context of 9.2-4 is Israels vain attempt to escape from YHWHs judg-
ment, so 9.5-6 is the judgments climax; a harvest hymn certainly would
seem misplaced.
When 4.13 is viewed as a creation-praise doxology, then it appears out
of context with 4.6-11, which presents a series of ve catastrophes (with
growing intensity).53 Carny realized the hymn fragments purpose must
be judgment: 4.13 is by no means a verse of praise, but a prophecy of
destruction, and is actually the punishment the prophet proclaims
(4.12).54 However, Carny did not specify how 4.13 is the punishment, i.e.,
an allusion to ood annihilation. 4.12s verbs are highly military in
character; Israel must prepare to do battle with YHWH.55 So are the
hymns creation-praise doxologies? Gillingham reasons not: Amos God

49. Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, p. 23: obtrusive;

P. Carny, Doxologies: A Scientic Myth, Hebrew Studies 18 (1977), pp. 149-59 (150):
misplaced; R. Gordis, Studies in the Book of Amos (New York: American Academy for
Jewish Research, 1980), pp. 201-64 (226): later insertions; Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 222.
50. J.R. Wood, Amos in Song and Book Culture (JSOTSup, 337; Shefeld: Shefeld
Academic Press, 2002). Wood goes as far as saying the editor/commentator who later
redacted Amos prophecy contradicts Amos (pp. 68, 78, 88, 90, 123), and downplays
(p. 78) Amos message of judgment: Editorial comments are added piecemeal and alter
the meaning of Amoss nal vision about the day of Yahweh (p. 77).
51. Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 38; Gaster, An Ancient
Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, pp. 23-26.
52. Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 342.
53. Story, Amos: Prophet of Praise, p. 75.
54. Carny, Doxologies: A Scientic Myth, p. 157.
55. J.H. Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet: His Times and his Preaching
(Nashville: Parthenon Press, 1988), p. 149.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 93

comes as the destroyer of the natural order He has created [This] is

seen in the doxologies [T]he evidence clearly shows that the purpose of
all three doxologies was to proclaim in hymnic form Israels God was
able to create and to destroy.56

7. Amos Hymn: Wisdom Literature?

Crenshaw dened wisdom literature as based on experience.57 It was the
wise mans function to offer courtly advise from personal experience.58
Crenshaw demonstrated Amos utilized wisdom motifs, which were
particularly concentrated within the hymns. Specically, Crenshaw ana-
lyzed vocabulary used in Amos 5.8, 9: 8=3, gleam, ash forth, occurs
four times (Ps. 39.13, a wisdom Psalm; and Job 9.27; 10.20, classical
wisdom literature);EH>=4, shadow of death, occurs 17 times (Job 9
times; Psalms 4 times; Isa. 9.2, Amos 5.8; plus two non-wisdom uses
found in Jer. 2.6; 13.64); 5, violence, ruin, occurs exclusively in the
wisdom literature and in Psalms.
Crenshaw discusses motifs, including woe oracles, identied by
Wolff in his analysis of wisdom literature, as well as theological issues
such as an interest in astronomy and Israels endall of which
specically apply to Amos hymn.
Crenshaw recognized Amos hymn came from a subsequent stage
textually and historically, and that the kinship with Job is striking.
Wisdom inuences within Amos hymn are not limited to linguistics, but
extend to theology. In a word, the faith of the wise is creation theol-
ogy.59 I would add that Crenshaws denition should include de-creation.
Crenshaw asked if wisdom literature as a genre sufciently describes
Amos hymn simply on the grounds of wisdoms basis in experience,
but was rather mediated through the ancient theophanic tradition.60

56. S. Gillingham, Who Makes the Morning Darkness: God and Creation in the
Book of Amos, Scottish Journal of Theology 45 (1991), pp. 165-84 (167, 172).
57. J.L. Crenshaw, The Inuence of the Wise upon Amos, ZAW 79 (1967), pp. 43-
51 (44).
58. Crenshaw (The Inuence of the Wise upon Amos, p. 43), cites McKane, who
re-examines the broader question of the relationship between prophets and wise men,
emphasizing the negative stance of prophecy over against the royal court of advisers who
could not afford the luxury of faith, but were forced to give realistic practical political
counsel. Wise men spoke from their experiences; cf. Solomons proverbs of natural
observations related to life.
59. Crenshaw, The Inuence of the Wise upon Amos, pp. 49-50.
60. Crenshaw, The Inuence of the Wise upon Amos, p. 51.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

94 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

Crenshaw later dened creations role within wisdom literature, and noted
an interest in the natural order (earthquake and storm), which link[s]
together theophanic tradition and wisdom.61 I suggest that the original
ancient author of Amos hymn was eye-witness to a great seismic event,
and thus continued this theophanic tradition, or even initiated it.
Cassuto recognized Hebrew literature is genre-dened by its use of
divine names; in particular, wisdom literature uses appelatives l, elha,
elhm or ebt, as apposed to YHWH.62 However, Amos hymn uses a
combination: elhm + YHWH (4.13). Does Cassutos denition deny
Amos hymn its wisdom status? Maybe not. As previously mentioned,
Jefferson discussed the high percentage of Ugaritic roots contained in
Psalm 110 etc. Jefferson identied non-Canaanite vocabulary within
Psalm 110, including the divine title YHWH. Gaster postulated Psalm 110
was Yahwized from an earlier Canaanite model,63 and discussed Amos
hymn in terms of other non-Yahwistic hymns.64
Cassuto described YHWHs title as a proper noun, the specic name
of Israels God, compared to elhm, an appellative common noun
applied to both Israels God and heathen gods.65 I suggest therefore that
Amos hymn was Yahwized, personalizing it for Israel. I therefore
bracket [YHWH] in my translation, to indicate a theoretical editorial
insertion.66

8. Amos Hymn: Poetry or Prose?

Cassuto explains that Hebrew poetic literature only uses the tetragram-
maton, but that in narrative literature (i.e. the Pentateuchs narrative
sections, the earlier Prophets, Jobs narrative section), Tetragrammaton
and elhm are both used in close proximity. These are the facts.67

61. J.L. Crenshaw, Amos and the Theophanic Tradition (Macon, GA: Mercer
University Press, 1967), pp. 203-15 (214).
62. U. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis (Jerusalem: Shalem Press, 2008), p. 25.
63. T.H. Gaster, Psalm 110, Journal of the Manchester University Egyptian and
Oriental Society 21 (1937), pp. 37-44. Gaster suggested praise of Baal (p. 44), but offered
no further linguistic support for this assertion.
64. Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, p. 23.
65. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis, p. 22.
66. Jefferson, Is Psalm 110 Canaanite?, p. 156: It is tempting to see in [Ps. 110] an
adaptation of Jebusite [sic] ritual used by David when he became ruler of Jerusalem.
Amos hymn could therefore contain Davidic or Amosian redactions.
67. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis, pp. 24-25.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 95

Amos 4.13 combines YHWH + elhm in close proximity, just as

Cassutos denition of narrative requires. YHWH is not singly used in
Amos hymn. The usage of divine names, therefore, denes Amos hymn
as narrative.68 But if, as my previous remarks suggest, YHWH was edited
into the hymn, can we still dene Amos genre?
Andersen and Freedman show that Amos hymn does not possess
features of classical poetry: its syllables, beat, and line lengths are all
irregular, and parallelism is minimal. Therefore, Attempts to nd regular
verse forms without recourse to drastic emendation have not been
successful.69
Andersen and Freedman dene Amos hymn as narrative: Two frag-
ments of a ood narrative do survive in 5.8b and 9.6b, where the use of
the ww-consecutive construction requires that the preceding participle be
construed as past tense. The same is true [for 9.5a; 5.8a; 9.6a].70 Also,
7.4s use of et and the denite article shows that it is composed in
standard prose.71 I summarize verb tenses of Amos and Jobs hymns
below:

Tense Amos Hymn

Four preterites 5.8; 9.6)<AJH; 7.4=<EH; 9.58H>EH
Two imperfects 5.9H3J; 8.8K8CE
Three perfects 5.8(JE9; 7.4J?C9; 9.69CDJ
Nine ww-perfects 8.8=3H; 9E=H; 9C8?H; 9B?H; 9B?H
7.49=<H; 9.5H=3H; 9E=H; 9BH
Tense Job Hymn
Three imperfects 9.6*H4=AEJ; 9.7ECKJ; )EIJ
Two perfects 9.5H5J; D<A9

The above table shows Amos hymns use of the ww-consecutive

construction compared to Job, which has none (cf. 9.10-13). At a glance
Amos is narrative, Job is poetic. On closer inspection, Amos uses nine
ww-perfects (future tense), interspersed with four imperfect ww-con-
secutives (preterite, past tense). This odd tense-mixing is explained by
MTs preservation of two different ancient Semitic tense systems. Driver
stated, this strange phenomenon, whereby two tenses apparently exchange

68. Job 9.13 refers to elah, though 9.5-9 does not directly use a divine name.
69. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 454.
70. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 453.
71. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, pp. 745-46.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

96 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

functions [is only accounted for by recognizing] two different systems,

drawn from different sources, merged in the Hebrew scheme of tenses.
Driver compared Akkadian and Aramaic verb constructions.72 The tense-
mixing in Amos hymn may further evidence antiquity. Amos hymn is
narrative, not poetic (as are wisdom texts), yet possesses clear wisdom
themes. Amos is therefore not wisdom poetry, but wisdom prose, an
unusual genre.

9. Covenant Treaty: An Exegetical Key?

Hillers surveyed ancient Near Eastern treaty documents and discovered
striking parallels within biblical covenantal passages, particularly the
curse formula. The sealing of promises by curses was characteristic of
ancient legal practicecurses were regarded as more important than
blessings which were promised for obedience, and blessing formulae
were ordinarily shorter than curse formulae.73
Hillers analyzed Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 for ancient Near
Eastern treaty patterns of blessings and curses in list form, arguing that
Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are essentially authentic ancient
Israelite curse-lists [that] may protably be drawn into the discussion of
treaty-curses and the prophets.74 Hillers analyzed twenty ancient Near
Eastern treaty-curses, successfully comparing them with the Sinai treaty
and writing prophets. In particular I am interested in Hillerss identi-
cation of the ood treaty-curse.
According to Hillers,
The treaty-curse which calls for ooding of the indels land has close Old
Testament parallels in comparisons of a conqueror to a deluge In
Esarhaddons annals, Enlil curses Babylon with a terrible curse, and a ood
destroys the city. Like a deluge (abbis, abbani) is a fairly common simile
for the onrush of the king in the Assyrian royal inscriptions.75

Once Hillers identied this specic genre, he recognized similar ood-

curse language in Isa. 8.7 and Jer. 46.7-8; 47.2, which describes YHWHs
ooding of rebellious lands with invading armies.

72. G.R. Driver as quoted in J. Weingreen, A Practical Grammar for Classical

Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), pp. 252-53.
73. D.R. Hillers, Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophets (unpublished PhD
dissertation; Rome Pontical Biblical Institute, 1964), p. 6.
74. Hillers, Treaty-Curses, p. 42.
75. Hillers, Treaty-Curses, pp. 70-71.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 97

I suggest Amos hymn was utilized as a ood treaty-curse, the most

catastrophic in Amos arsenal, describing YHWHs seismic theophany
(1.1), and Israels exilic ood of invaders.76 The Noachian covenant
involved salvation within the Ark of a faithful remnant. Amos hymn was
used to warn of Israels destruction, as when the ood came, but YHWHs
faithful remnant would be saved to enjoy a restored Edenic world (9.11-
15). I further establish the hymns ood relatedness by offering the
comparisons below.

10. Flood: An Exegetical Key?

I compare Amos hymn, Job 9.5[-13], and Genesis ood account to
investigate common ood themes. First, is Jobs material relevant or
hymnic? Scholars recognize Job 9.5-10 as hymnic;77 F.I. Andersen
compares it with Amos 4.13.78 Others view vv. 5-13 as a literary unit.79
Gordis stated Job was citing older sources.80 Habel recognized that Jobs
hymn describes an earthquake of such cataclysmic proportions that the
pillars of the earth totter.81 Hartley saw language descriptive of the-
ophany.82 Carny sees great similarities between Amos and Jobs doxolo-
gies, referring to their threats of doom, rather than praise.83 Clines noted
Job 9.5-10s strict hymnic form, possessing ve introductory partici-
ples84 (strikingly reminiscent of Amos 4.13s ve participles). I present
below my thematic comparison of Amos, Job and Genesis ood account.

76. K.J. Cathcart and R.P. Gordon, The Aramaic Bible. XIV. The Targum of the
Minor Prophets (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1989), pp. 93, 95. Utilizing ood-
curse metaphor, Aramaic Targum Amos paraphrases 8.8; 9.5 as A king shall come up
against it with his army which is great like the waters of a river, and he shall cover it all
and drive out its inhabitants.
77. J.E. Hartley, The Book of Job (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), p. 41;
G.V. Smith, Is there a Place for Jobs Wisdom in Old Testament Theology?, Trinity
Journal 13 (1992), pp. 3-20 (13); Crenshaw, The Inuence of the Wise upon Amos, pp.
49-50; Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 217.
78. F.I. Andersen, Job, an Introduction and Commentary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity
Press, 1976), p. 145.
79. A. Lo, Job 28 as Rhetoric in the Context of Job 2231 (VTSup, 97; Leiden: Brill,
2002). Lo cites Hartley, Habel, Westermann, Newsom, all of whom view Job 9.5-13 as a
single hymn, pp. 133-40.
80. R. Gordis, The Book of Job (New York: Moreshet, 1978), p. 522.
81. N.C. Habel, The Book of Job (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985), p. 190.
82. Hartley, The Book of Job, p. 169.
83. Carny, Doxologies: A Scientic Myth, p. 154.
84. D.J.A. Clines, Job 120 (WBC, 17; Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1989), p. 224.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

98 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

4.13 Amos Hymn Ref. Genesis Flood vv. Job Hymn

a Lo! Behold! 6.17 Lo! Behold! (J??9) [12] [Lo! Behold! (*9)]
(9?9)
b Former of 7.20 Mountains ()JC9) 5 He removes the
mountains ()JC9) were covered mountains ()JC9)
c Creator of wind 8.1b God made a wind 9 He madethe
(IHC) (IHC) south [wind]
c Declarer of 8.21 The thoughts of [11] [I do not
Adams ()5) Adams ()5) heart understand him]
thoughts
f He trod down 7.19 Were covered 8b And treads ((CH5H)
((C5H)
f High places of 7.19 On the earth 8b On waves of the
the earth (#C9 =) all high sea ()JJE>3=)
(#CJE>3=) hills
g [YHWH] elh 9.26 YHWH elh m [13] [elha]
ebt em
5.8
a Formed Orion 8, 9 Made Pleiades and
and Pleiades Orion (9>J<=JD<)
(=JD< 9>J<)
b And overthrew 5b He overturns
((A9H) ()<A9)
c Making day ()HJ) 8.22 Day ()HJ)and night 7 The sun, and it does
dark as night (9=J=) not cease not rise
(9=J=)
d He called for 6.17 I myself am 7 He commands
bringing
d Waters of the 6.17 Flood waters 8b Waves of the sea
ocean ()J9)J>) ()J>=H3>) ()J)
E Face of the earth 7.4b Face of the earth 6 Shakes the earth
(#C9J?A) (9>C9J?A) (#C)
5.9
a Destruction upon 6.4 Became strong men [13b] [Allies (CK)of the
the strong (K) proud]
b Devastating their 6.13 I will destroy them 6 Shakes the earth
defenses with the earth (#C) out of its
(#C) place

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 99

7.4
a Lo! Behold! 6.17 Lo! Behold! (J??9) 12 [Lo! Behold! (*9)]
(9?9H)
b adny [YHWH] 6.17 I myself am 7 He commands
called for bringing
d Consumed the 7.11 Great Deep 6a Shakesearth out
Great Deep (93C)H9E) broken of its place ()HB>)
(93C)H9E)
8.8
a Earth quake 6a Earthits pillars
(#CK8C) tremble (#CKJ8C)
b All its inhabitants 6.13 Earthlled with 13c [Allieslie
lament? violence prostrate beneath
him]
c All things arose 8a Spreads out the
as the light heavens
9.5
d Everything arose 7.20 Waters ()J>) 8b The high (=) sea
(9E=H) prevailed ()J>)
upwards (9=>=>)
e Subsided (9BH) 8.1 The waters ()J>) 8b Treads upon the
like the River subsided (H<JH) sea ()J>)
9.6
a Built ascents 7.11 All the fountains 8 Spreads out the
(HEH=>) (*J>) heavens ()J>)
e YHWH em 9.26 YHWH elh m [13] [elha]

My comparison demonstrates strong vocabulary and thematic correlations

between Amos, Job, and Genesis 69. I further present an analysis of
shared vocabulary (and their Old Testament frequencies) between the
hymns of Amos and Job.85
Shared Vocabulary Amos Hymn Job Hymn Frequency
9>J< 5.8a 9.9 3
=JD< 5.8a 9.9 3
(C5H 4.13f 9.8 6
JE>3= 4.13f 9.8 6
)JC9 4.13f 9.5 58
)J 5.8d; 9.6c 9.8 254
)J> 9.6a 9.8 394
9?9 4.13a; 7.4a [9.11, 12] 448
#C 4.13f; 5.8e; 8.8a; 9.5b, 9.6 b, d 9.6 1529

85. occurrences were established using Bible Works 8.0 morphological searches.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

100 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

The two hymns share much vocabulary (including rare occurrences

and ve participles), adding to the probability that both hymns are
co-dependent literature.

11. Are the Hymns Divine Names Associated with the Flood?
The divine names used in Amos hymn are unique and highly signicant,
occurring at the books pivotal point (5.8), and conclusion (9.6).86 The
abbreviated form (9.5a) of the redactor is unique,87 and highlighted as
key.88
The linguistic roots of the divine names used in Amos hymn are
known from ancient Near Eastern sources (see table below). YHWH is
unique to Israel.89

Hebrew BDB Denition Akkadian, Sumerian Ugaritic

Babylonian
adny 147 Lord, master adn
elh 482 god, angel, ruler, judge ilu il il
em 10046 name em m
ebt 7982 host, army, war, warfare u u
YHWH 2314 Proper name God of Israel

Crenshaw analyzed YHWH elh ebt em (occurring twice in MT);

YHWH em (four times); YHWH ebt em (twelve times). Crenshaw
summarized his ndings as follows: These passages possess a striking
formal similarity, manifest a surprising degree of uniformity of themes,
and appear to come from the same general period.90 I present my analysis
of these passages to determine any ood vocabulary/allusion they may
contain.

86. R.W. Byargeon, The Doxologies of Amos: A Study of their Structure and
Theology, Theological Educator 52 (1995), pp. 47-56 (56).
87. Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 341.
88. M.D. Carroll R., Contexts for Amos (Shefeld: JSOT Press, 1992), p. 217.
89. See the discussion below.
90. J.L. Crenshaw, YHWH e em: A Form-Critical Analysis, ZAW 81 (1969),
pp. 156-75 (156).

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 101

Divine Name Ref. Flood Allusion/Vocabulary

YHWH em Exod. 15.3 15.1, 4, 19, 20, 21 ()J); 15. 5, 8 (E>9E, )J>)
Jer. 33.2 33.20, 25 (Noahic covenant); 33.22 ()J)
Amos 5.8-9, 5.8d ()J, )J>); 5.24 ()J>, =I?);
27; 9.6e 9.6c ()J, )J>)
YHWH elh m Gen. 9.26 9.2 ()J); 9.9-18 (Noahic covenant);
9.11 ()J>); 9.11, 15 (=H3>)
YHWH ebt em Isa. 47.2 (EH9?JC3)
47.4 48.13 ()J>9IA); 48.18 (C9?, )J9J=8<);
48.2 48.21 ()J>)
51.15 51.9 (39C); 51.10 ()J, )J>, )H9E 3C,
54.5 )JB>> )J, C3); 51.13 (9?)J>);
51.15 ()J9,HJ=8)
54.9 (I?J>); 54.10 ()JC99); 54.11 (9CD)
Jer. 10.12 ()J>9?);91 10.13 ()J>*H>9)
10.16 31.35 (Noahic covenant, )J9,HJ=8)
31.35 32.17, 21-21 (multiple embedded allusions)
32.18 46.7, 8 (EHC9?<, )J>;CJ,C9?,)J>);
46.18 46.18 ()J)
48.15 48.32 ()JHC3); 48.34 ()J>)
50.34
50.38 (H3JH9J>J>);92 50.42 ()J)
51.19, 57
51.13, 16, 55 ()J3C)J><)9J=8);
51.15 ()J> 9?); 51.36, 42 (3C9 )J,CHB>)
[YHWH] elh Amos 4.13e 4.13a-c, f (multiple embedded allusions)
ebt em

Crenshaw stated regarding the em afxed to the epithet that it derives

from the theophanic tradition.93 My thematic analysis re-species Cren-
shaws theophanic analysis to ood-theophanic vocabulary and metaphor,
demonstrating an absolute correlation, suggesting these + em epithets
represent unique ood-theophanic divine epithets and/or known literary
devices which allude to the ood. Crenshaw cites Wambacq, who recog-
nized Amos, Isaiah and Jeremiah may all have quoted from an ancient
hymn.94 I suggest the representative of this literature is Amos ood
hymn, which presents a literary key in terms of its use of ood epithets,
enabling identication of these Old Testament examples.

91. Cf. Job 9.8; Zech. 12.1.

92. Cf. Gen. 8.7, 13, 14.
93. Crenshaw, YHWH e em, p. 168 (Exod. 20.24; 3.14; 6.2; 24.3-18; 33.19;
34.5-35; 2 Sam. 7.5-29; Hos. 12.9; 13.4).
94. Crenshaw, YHWH e em, p. 158.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

102 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

These passages include Egypt, Red Sea and Jordan-crossing motifs.

Gunn comments on Isa. 54.9-10s reference to Noah and the ood,
revealing Isaiah saw Israels exile and deliverance as being of the same
order as the events of the ood, being an event of great paradigmatic
value for the people.95
Gunn demonstrates metaphors such as sea-splitting, paths and
crossings-over, all of which contain multiple embedded allusions to the
Arks journey from old world to new (cf. Ps. 77.16-20). Wind occurs
within the Red Sea passages, and is a prominent motif in Genesis ood
account where YHWH sent a wind to dry up the ood waters (Gen. 8.1b).
Gunn asked, if this primeval story was one of such signicance for the
prophet, is it not likely that it has left its mark elsewhere in his poetry?96 I
would suggest this is the case, with Amos Israels rst writing prophet
blazing a trail from the start.

12. Covenant and Flood Exegetical Keys: Unlocking Meaning within

Amos Hymn?
My analysis demonstrates Amos hymn describes the ood. I will now
provide the reader with two exegetical keys with which to test further
the hymns ood-relatedness, unlocking meaning within the hymn and
surrounding context. The rst key is Covenant (plus treaty-curses), the
second, ood (plus seismic theophany). If my keys are valid they will
unlock the hymns contextual relationships and develop a ood-hymn
Sitz im Leben. A condensed working commentary is presented below.

a. Hymn Fragment 4.13a-g

4.13a: Lo! Behold! (cf. 7.4a) emphasizes YHWHs action of initiating
the ood (cf. J??9, Gen. 6.17). Israel comes face to face with this same
God. Amos presents YHWH as Suzerain, who executes the full force of
the covenant curses, outlined in 4.2-12.

4.13b: formed mountains.97C4HJdescribes clay formed by a potter.

Amos prophesied Israel would be re-formed, by the God who judged
and re-formed the mountains during the ood (Gen. 7.20). Samarias

95. D.M. Gunn, Deutero-Isaiah and the Flood, JBL 94 (1975), pp. 493-508 (493).
96. Gunn, Deutero-Isaiah and the Flood, p. 493.
97. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 453: The participles are in
effect titles [Former of mountains], almost names. As such there could be any number
of them and in any kind of arrangement.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 103

mountains (3.9; 4.1) are therefore not immoveable. The rich oppressed
the poor, resulting in judgment, great tumults in her midst (3.9), where
their only escape route would be through broken walls (4.3a), a meta-
phor describing earthquake damage.

4.13c: created wind. YHWH sent a wind to dry up the ood waters (Gen.
8.1). YHWH sent an east wind to part the Red Sea on behalf of his
covenant people (Exod. 14.21; cf. Exod. 10.13). YHWH who blew on Red
Sea and ood, now blows upon Israel in judgment.

4.13d: his thought,CI. YHWH declares to Israel what their thoughts are
(cf. 5.12-15). The pre-Diluvians thoughts were evil continually (Gen.
6.5; 8.21), provoking the ood judgment. Amos judges Israels complete
degeneracy of thoughts and mindsthey despised the law, not keeping
the commandments (2.4).

4.13e: making dawn into darkness, YHWHs cosmic-scale theophanic

judgment (cf. 5.8b). The Day of the Lord (5.18, 20) meant darkness
and not lightvery dark, with no brightness (cf. 8.9). YHWH reverses
blessings upon his people, with this covenant-curse (cf. 4.10), where the
ninth plague, darkness, covered Egypt (Exod. 10.21-23). Egypts plagues
are turned against Israel for treaty violations in accordance with Deut.
28.60. YHWHs judgment causes even daylight to fail (cf. 4.13e; 5.8b, c,
and 5.18, 20).

4.13f: tread,(C5H, a military term. Israel treads down the poor

(5.11); therefore YHWH treads down Israel. Leviticus 26.30 describes a
covenant-curse unleashed upon Israels cult centres (cf. Mic. 1.3).
Bethels altar horns would be cut off by earthquake (3.14-15). Amos
reminds Israel there is no way to escape YHWH of Hosts wrath against
her idolatrous religion. YHWH, the mighty conqueror, will tread/thresh
down Bethels altars (3.14; 5.5-6), as he trod down the mountains during
the ood.

b. Hymn Fragment 5.8a-9b

5.8a: 9>J< (possibly Pleiades) reminds Israel that YHWH of Hosts (5.16)
has power to remove Israel from their gods, and into captivity (5.26-
27; 7.17). Hosts refers to stars/angelic powers (cf. Gen. 2.1) with
prohibitions not to worship them (Deut. 4.19; cf. Gen. 6.2-7). Idolatry
brought down YHWHs covenant-curses upon Israel (Deut. 5.6-10; 6.14-
15). The God of Hosts alone must be worshiped, not the host of gods!

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

104 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

 =JD< (possibly Orion, fool/giant98) occurs alongside a reversal of the

Noachian covenant in a proclamation against Babylon (Isa. 13.10). The
mention of Orion and Pleiades (strongly associated in Rabbinic literature
with the ood)99 would evoke fear of cosmic-scale judgment within the
ancient Hebrew mind.

5.8b: overthrew morning,(A9H, binds the hymn grammatically to its

context (5.7). Night becoming morning cannot be viewed as punishment
for Israels sins (cf. Job 5.14; 9.7). My translation follows the natural
Hebrew word order, which is: overthrows morning into deep-darkness.
This then parallels the next phrase.

5.8c: making day dark as night (cf. 4.13e; 8.9). This is a reversal of
the Noachic covenant (Gen. 8.22b), of dependable daynight cycles.100
Considered by some to be eclipse language,101 or else a darkness
covenant-curse102 comparable to Deut. 28.29 (You shall grope at noon-
dayin darkness), 5.8c describes the cosmic ramications of Israels sin.

5.8e: poured out. Israel lays/casts-down righteousness to the earth (5.7),

therefore judgment is poured upon Israel. Hillers suggests the ood-treaty
curse,103 a metaphor of invasion (cf. 5.27; 6.7; 7.17). Upon the face of the
earth (cf. 9.8) strikingly parallels Genesis ood account,104 revealing the
universality of YHWHs judgment on Israels population and land. Amos
audience, aware of Torahs ood account, would appreciate the full
implications of Amos hymns metaphor and threatening use of it. Woods

98. Clines, Job 120, p. 231: Kesil associated with Orion the giant in Targum and
Peshitta.
99. C. Milikowsky, Kima and the Flood in Seder Olam and B.T. Rosh Ha-
Shana Stellar Time-Reckoning and Uranography in Rabbinic Literature, Proceedings of
the American Academy for Jewish Research 50 (1983), pp. 105-32 (127).
100. I. Drazin and S.M. Wagner, Onkelos on the Torah: Genesis (Jerusalem: Gefen,
2006). Ibn Ezra comments on Gen. 7.11: The ood was so strong that it was impossible
to distinguish between day and night, which is why God promised in His subsequent
covenant (8.22) that day and night will not cease, p. 38.
101. Gillingham, Who Makes the Morning Darkness , p. 169; R.S. Cripps,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Amos (London: SPCK, 1969),
p. 248; Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209; D.A. Hubbard, Joel and Amos
(TOTC; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1989), p. 222.
102. D.J. Wiseman, The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon, Iraq 20 (1958), pp. i-ii
and 1-99 (60, 66)
103. Cf. Isa. 8.7; Jer. 46.7-8; 47.2.
104. Cf. Gen. 6.7, 23; 7.3-4, 23; 8.9, 21; 11.8.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 105

recognized that Amos interpretation of the Day of Yahweh resembled the

great Flood which Yahweh once summoned and poured out upon the
surface of the earth (5.8).105

c. Hymn Fragment 7.4

Amos vision-report parallels eight motifs of ery judgment associated
with Amos earthquake.106

7.4a: Lo! Behold! connects this vision-report to hymn 4.13a, and

YHWHs personal involvement in the ood (Gen. 6.17).

7.4c: Called for judgment by re. Andersen and Freedman see a great
similarity between this phrase and two calling for water phrases (5.8;
9.6).107

7.4d: YHWHs re consumes the Great Deep, a specic ood term,108

and its portion, tract, territory (BDB-3115). Andersen and Freedman
explain that B=I9 refers to patrimonial land, and in the case of Amos
7.4 must be something matching the Great Deepnot a synonym, but a
compliment.109 Deuteronomy 32.9 describes Jacob as YHWHs portion
(B=I). Andersen and Freedman suggest this portion refers to Israel and
Judah which are consumed along with all nations. The vision provoked
Amos to intercede for small Jacob (7.5), causing YHWH to repent ()I?),
a word rst used in Gen. 6.6 to describe YHWHs repentance over creating
humankind, thereby bringing the ood.110

d. Hymn Fragment 8.8

8.8a: Did not the earth quake for this? (K8CE=).Cosmic-scale destruc-
tion is assured. The land itself suffers for Israels sins, and soon would
spew them out as wormwood/bitterness (5.7; cf. 6.12). Commentators
generally recognize 8.8as earthquake metaphor.111

105. J.R. Wood, Amos in Song and Book Culture (JSOTSup, 337; Shefeld:
Shefeld Academic Press, 2002), p. 66.
106. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 748 (cf. Gen. 19.24;
Amos 4.11). Cf. Amos 1.4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2.2, 5; 5.6.
107. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, pp. 746-47; cf. Deut. 32.22.
108. Cf. Isa. 51.10, tehom also describes earths depths Gen. 49.25; Deut. 33.13.
109. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 747.
110. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, pp. 748-49.
111. Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209; Hammershaimb, The Book of
Amos, p. 125. Cf. Job 9.6b, which says the earths pillars tremble.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

106 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

8.8c: All things arose (9E=H) as the light (C<). The subject is the
trembling land of 8.8a. This cannot refer to the Niles natural irrigation
as some scholars theorize.112 When compared with 8.14, they shall fall
and never rise again (cf. 5.1-2), 8.8 is anything but seasonal. Recog-
nizing 8.8cs light disturbance imagery links to 8.9s eclipse language,
thus binding text to context, suggesting cosmological ramications for
Israels sins in response to Israels covenant violations (8.4-7).

8.8e (cf. 9.5e): River of Mizraim ()JC4>CJ). The juxtaposition of

seismic theophany next to Nile seasonal imagery has caused scholars
some confusion. Cripps called 8.8 a perplexing simile,113 because earth-
quakes are sudden, compared to Nile ood seasons. Such perplexing
similes cannot be resolved within a creation-praise doxology understand-
ing, the language describes a prolonged and catastrophic judgment.114 8.8
clearly describes the year-long ood, metaphorically used by Amos as a
ood-covenant curse.

e. Hymn Fragment 9.5

9.5b: He struck the earth and it melted. 8H?9 (BDB-5885), touch,
reach, strike. Amos re motifs are highly signicant, describing
YHWHs theophanic judgments upon Israel and her neighbours for their
sins.115 8H? indicates catastrophic and permanent change to the place
being struck.116 Amos reminds Israel using seismic theophany language
that YHWH descended at Sinai in smoke, re and earthquake (Exod.
19.18) to ratify Israels covenant (Exod. 24); YHWH now descends in
ery judgment to fulll its curses upon Israel as treaty violators.

9.5d, e (cf. 8.8c, d): Verbs describing the rise and fall of the Nile waters
are reminiscent of the rise and fall of the ood waters in Genesis: Amos
8.8 reads everything arose (9E=H; cf. Gen. 7.20, waters prevailed
upwards [9=>=>]), while Amos 9.5 reads and subsided (9BH) like
the River of Egypt (cf. Gen. 8.1, the waters subsided [H<JH]). Context

112. Hammershaimb, The Book of Amos, p. 125. Hammershaimb reasoned Amos

never visited Egypt, not comprehending the Niles behaviour.
113. Cripps, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, p. 246.
114. Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209.
115. Cf. 1.4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2.2, 5; 4.11; 5.6; 7.4.
116. Story, Amos: Prophet of Praise, pp. 76-77.

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

 COX The Hymn of Amos 107

must not be confused; the land is the subject, which is disturbed, like
the Nile, best understood as vivid earthquake imagery.117

9.6a: He built ascending-ascents into heaven. Escape from YHWHs

wrath is impossible though they climb up to heaven, YHWH will bring/
cast them down (9.2). Wolff described 9.6s imagery as unparalleled.118
The verbs point towards the structures height into the heavens, as well as
the depths from which it ascends from beneath the earth.119 I conclude
with Mller: Like the second fragment, it features an allusion to the ood
(5.8b; 9.6b) and stresses the cosmic dimension of Yahwehs rule (5.8a;
9.6a) 9.5-6 envisages a divine intervention on a more cosmic scale,
causing all who live on the earth to mourn.120

13. Conclusions
Amos, Israels rst writing prophet, predicted Jerusalems destruction and
drew upon extant and familiar literature for his books template. SCL
came pre-packaged, with ood metaphor as its destructive agent par
excellence. Amos both drew upon and parodied this genre, but rather than
quoting from SCL, it seems an ancient ood narrative was utilized as a
ood covenant-curse, a narrative which authentically reected both
Sumerian and Egyptian ood motifs. Analysis of these passages use of
ww-consecutive and divine names leads to the conclusion Amos hymn
is prose, not poetry. The hymns genre is further dened by its use of
wisdom-specic vocabulary, making it wisdom prose, a rare genre.
Comparisons with Jobs wisdom ood-hymn 9.5-9[-13] demonstrates
probable co-dependency.
Amos ood narrative seems to have started life as an ancient cunei-
form tablet deriving from the cradle of civilization judging by its high
percentage of Sumerian, Akkadian and Babylonian parallel roots, before
being updated with Canaanite vocabulary (c. 75% linking it with the
Ugaritic ood psalms); ww-consecutive tense-mixing is further evidence

117. Paul, A Commentary on the Book of Amos, p. 261.

118. Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 342.
119. Andersen and Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 719: This structure is in
the heavens but has been founded upon the earth (or even the underworld); in other words
its foundations are deepcf. Ps. 78.69.
120. K. Mller, Hear this Word against You: A Fresh Look at the Arrangement
and the Rhetorical Strategy of the Book of Amos, VT 50 (2000), pp. 499-518 (514).

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014

108 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38.1 (2013)

of antiquity. Such a tablet(s) could well have been stored in Jerusalems

temple library, before being redacted into Amos prophecy as a potent
covenant curse. I suggest this literature was also used within 7.4s ery
vision report, judging by its use of ww-consecutive, common ood
vocabulary, and rare ancient Near Eastern parallel roots.
The context of Amos hymn demands a treaty-curse understanding,
specically the ood-curse identied by D. Hillers. The hymns vocabu-
lary is clearly ood related when compared to Genesis 610. The strong
correlation between + em compound divine names and ood-related
verses within the writing prophets suggests a unique divine-ood epithet
and literary device. Identifying ood-judgment and covenant-curse as
exegetical keys has unlocked meaning within Amos, demonstrating these
are valid keys to exegete the original intent and message of the author,
revealing the hymn fragments and their contexts are inseparable, so
dismissing historically extended, multiple editor redaction theories.
Identifying SCL as Amos literary template has also shown 9.11-15s
SCL-like restoration passage could well be genuine to Amos prophecy
of destruction and restoration.
Using SCL as his template, Amos carefully wove these ancient but
familiar ood verses, like strands, into the literary fabric of his book, thus
providing a potent ood covenant-curse and an illustration for his vision
report (7.4). By so doing, Amos emphasized YHWHs threat of imminent
destruction of a covenant-violating Israel, but also offered eschatological
restoration for a repentant remnant.
Amos prophecy was seismically fullled at 1.1, two years before the
earthquake (c. 750 BCE). The political ramications were felt in 722 BCE
when Shalmaneser V besieged and captured Jerusalem (cf. 2 Kgs 17.3-7).
Isaiah prophesied this event using strikingly Amosian ood-curse/SCL
language.
Behold, the Lord has a mighty and strong one,
Like a tempest of hail and a destroying storm,
Like a ood of mighty waters overowing,
Who will bring them down to the earth with his hand. (Isa. 28.2; cf. vv. 17-18)

Downloaded from jot.sagepub.com by Pi Vi on December 19, 2014