First published in: Cox, G. M. The 'Hymn' of Amos: an Ancient Flood-Narrative. Journal for

the Study of the Old Testament Vol 38.1 (2013): 81-108.

The 'Hymn' of Amos: an Ancient Flood-Narrative.

Abstract

A comparison of Amos with Sumerian City-Lament (SCL) reveals it was probably used as Amos'

literary-template. Amos also contains references to the Flood, used as a covenant-curse to warn

Israel of her treaty violations. I compare these Flood passages, 4.13; 5.8+9; 8.8; 9.5+6, (described

by scholars as 'hymnic'), with SCL, Genesis' Flood account, and Job 9.5-10, a similar Flood-like

hymn, in order to determine common vocabulary and themes. Analyzing the Amos hymn's

vocabulary roots reveals an ancient narrative source. Exploration of the passage's literary

connections to Amos in terms of a 'flood covenant-curse', demonstrates why such literature was

utilized. I also discuss my new proposal that Amos' hymn should be extended to incorporate a

fragment at 7.4.

Keywords

Ancient Near East (ANE), Covenant treaty-curse, Flood, Hapax-Legomenon (HL), Massoretic Text

(MT), Septuagint Text (LXX), seismic-theophany, Sumerian City-Lament (SCL), -consecutive.

Introduction

Amos of Tekoa; Israel's first 'writing-prophet' (circa 750 B.C.); 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 motif...'2.

1 Paul, S.M., 1991. A Commentary on the Book of Amos. Hermeneia, Augsburg Fortress, USA, p. 36.2 Austin, S., Franz, G.W., Frost, E.G. 2000. Amos' Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750

B.C. International Geology Review, 42:7, pp. 657-671, (657).

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 Flood, in

order to warn Israel of the covenant-curses resulting from treaty-violations. 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 Adam's thoughts,

e Making dawn into darkness,

f He trod down the high-places of the earth,

g [YHWH] ehe sat sem !

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] sem !

3 Hillers, D.R., 1992. Lamentations. The Anchor Bible, New York, Doubleday; Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W., 1993. Weep, ODaughter of Zion: A Study of the City-Lament Genre in the Hebrew Bible. Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, Roma;Petter, D.L., 2009. The Book of Ezekiel: Patterned after a Mesopotamian City Lament? PhD dissertation Departmentof Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations University of Toronto, pp. 1-231; Li-Chiou L.I., 2012. SCLs andLamentations in the Hebrew Bible. MA dissertation, Boston University School of Theology; Radine, J., 2010. TheBook of Amos in Emergent Judah. Germany, Mohr Siebeck; McDaniel, T.F., 1968. The Alleged Sumerian Influenceupon Lamentations. Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 18/2, pp. 198-209.

4 All Hebrew definitions and ref. numbers are taken from: Brown, F., Driver, S.R., Briggs, C.A., 1907. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Source: BibleWorks® 8.0).

5.9 a Flashing-forth devastation upon the strong,

b Devastating their defenses.

7.4 a Lo Behold!

b anay [YHWH],

c Called for judgment by fire,

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 anay [YHWH] sat!

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 earth's foundations.

c He called for the waters of the ocean,

d And poured them out upon the face of the earth,

e [YHWH] sem !

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 Scholars opinions are

diverse that these verses could represent two, or three hymns, or one hymn having two-four

different strophes. However, due to similarities of the verses participles, and that 9.6 repeats 5.8,

one is 'forced' to think in terms of one hymn, due to shared formal characteristics and themes.6 I will

build a new case that 7.4 contains an hymnic-fragment.

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

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 & 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 flood 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 SCL influenced Jeremiah's Lamentations and all OT writing-prophets

5 Watts J.D.W., 1956. An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1,pp. 33-39, (33).

6 Wolff, H.W., 1977. Joel und Amos, Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, p. 215.7 McComiskey, T.E., 1987. The Hymnic Elements of the Prophecy of Amos. A Study of Form Critical Methodology.

JETS, 30/2, pp. 139-157, (156).8 Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 35.9 Gaster, T.H., 1935. An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos. Journal of the Manchester Egyptian and Oriental

Society, Vol. XIX, pp. 23-26, (23).10 Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, pp. 140-1.11 Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, pp. 57-8; Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, p. 144-6.12 Hillers, Lamentations, p. 33.

'would seem to be established',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, 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, Sumer's destruction and celebration of

the 'cities' restoration and return of their gods'.18 Lamentation over the Destruction of Nippur,

contains clear examples of the citie's restoration.19 I note Amos 9.8-15 reveals striking parallels with

Uruk Lament's restoration passage.20 UrL-12.12; UrL-12.13 cf. 9.13 'flowing wine; abundant

produce'; UrL-12.6-7 cf. 9.11 'exalted temple; restored sacrifices'; UrL-12.29-30 cf. 9:13-15 'Edenic

restoration'.

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 Israel's destruction and restoration, thereby making redaction-

theories of 9.8-15's secondary insertion, invalid.

13 Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 156.14 Ibid, pp. 143-6.15 Radine, The Book of Amos in Emergent Judah, pp. 142-3. (LSUr 31-37, 71, 153, 184, 446; cf., exile themes in Am

4.2-3; 5.5; 5.27; 6.7; 7.17; 9.4).16 Ibid, p. 158.17 Ibid, p. 151.18 Green, M.W., 1984. The Uruk Lament. Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 104/2, pp. 253-279, (253).19 Kramer, S.N., 1991. The Lamentation over the Destruction of Nippur. Acta Sumerologica, Vol. 13, pp. 1-26. (20-23;

25). See 8th Kirugu lines 248-299.20 Green, The Uruk Lament, pp. 275-6.21 Hammershaimb, E., 1970. The Book of Amos. A Commentary. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, p. 135.22 Andersen, F.I., and D.N. Freedman, 1989. Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Doubleday,

USA, p. 863-4.

In particular Amos hymn is strikingly reminiscent of LSUr 72-84.23

On that day, Enlil brought the Guti out from the mountains.

Their coming was the flood of Enlil that cannot be withstood,

The great storm of the plain filled 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.

Amos Phrase/Vocabulary SCL Phrase/Vocabulary

4.13b Former of mountains (Myrh). K.323824 The word [of Enlil] shattered the mountain

()

5.8b And overthrew morning into the shadow

of death.

LSUr25

72-84

The heavens were darkened, they were

covered by a shadow...

5.8c Making day dark (Ky#$xh) as night. UL

1.12

That One turned pitch black (- i); as at

night...

5.9a+b Flashing forth (gylbmh) devastation

upon the strong...

UL 1.14

LSUr

That One filled (the world) with its roar

(balag)...

The storm was a harrow coming from

23 Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 58.24 Langdon, S., 1913. Babylonian Liturgies, Paris Librairie, Paul Geuthner, pp. 1-274, Litany of Nebo, p. 65. A striking

earthquake hymn. See also: Green, The Uruk Lament, pp. 265, 266, 270, 273, 274, 275.25 Dobbs-Allsop, Weep, O Daughter of Zion, p. 58.

Devastating their defenses. 72-84 above, the city struck by a pickaxe.

7.4d+e ...consumed the Great Deep,

And consumed its portion (plain).

LSUr

72-84

The great storm of the plain, went

before them. The wide plain was

destroyed...

8.8d+e

9.5d+e

Arose..and subsided as the Nile. UL 3.3

3.15a

a devastating deluge...

makes the Tigris and Euphrates quaver...

9.5c And all its inhabitants lamented. LSUr

72-84

...the people were afraid.

9.5d Everything arose as the River. UL 5.20 Subir, rising up like a swelling floodwave.

9.6a He built ascending-ascents (wtwl(m)

into heaven.

UL 5.7 ...rose up (il) to heaven... heaven perished...

Job

9.5 He removes the mountains (syrh) UL

3.16b

At its reverberation the mountain (hur) peaks

shall be uprooted.

9.6 shakes the earth...pillars tremble. UL

3.15b; 17

it shall make the mountains rumble.

Sumer and Akkad shall shiver...

9.7 He commands the sun, and it does not

rise...

LSUr

72-84

The sun lay down at the horizon...

Themes of flood, fire, darkness and earthquake are shared between Amos and Job's hymns versus

SCL. However, SCL contains much divergent material. The question of shared vocabulary should

be quantified. To investigate, I compared Amos and Job's hymn vocabulary roots to standard ANE

sources,26 to establish any commonalities. 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

26 Roth, T.M., (Editor-in-Charge), 1956-2010. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University ofChicago. Vols. 1-21, Illinois. (CAD); Lete, d.O., Sanmartín, G.J., 2003. A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language inthe Alphabetic Tradition. Vols I&II.; Leiden, Boston, Brill; Halloran, J.A., 2009. Sumerian Lexicon Version 3.0.(http://www.sumerian.org/sumerlex.htm); Tinney, S., 2006. Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary.(http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd/).

27 Further work could reveal more ANE connections. A %min-max range reflects any uncertainties of comparison. (Mybasic vocabulary analysis did not include grammatical particles, or comparisons with ANE grammaticalconstructions).

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

Σ% 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

Σ% 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

29, 93, 18 which all mention the Flood.28 Jefferson concluded such strong Canaanite colouring

'supports the view' that Psalm 110 is 'primitive and pre-Exilic in date'.29 I hold this view for Amos

and Job's hymns. Both hymns utilize a striking number of rare verbs (possibly hapax-legomenon),

summarized below.30

(BDB#) HL Amos Job Akkadian Babylonian Sumarian Ugaritic

(102) wtdg)w 9.6 gududu gud /ʕ-g-d/ (?)

(7533) qyt(mh 9.5 qatu equ /ʕ-t-q/

(1234) gylbmh 5.9 balag balu zalag /p-l-g/

(1951) h#$rgnw 8.8 rahasu rasu risi /g-r-s/

(2453) Kphw, Mkph 5.8 9.5 abaku kam /h-p-k/

(3549) Ky#$xh 5.8 hesi

(3468) srxl 9.7 harasu hara su hrhrt

28 Jefferson, H.G., 1954. Is Psalm 110 Canaanite? Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 73, pp. 152-156. Ps. 68 'noted forits Ugaritic parallels', which also contains strong theophanic imagery, p. 154.

29 Ibid, p. 153.30 BibleWorks®8.0 morphological searches suggests, (but does not prove) these HLs, other workers may feel free to

amend my list. I restricted my search to Job 9:5-9.

(5091) (gwnh 9.5 mug (?)

(7725) Nwclpty 9.6 buluh plsn (?)

(8891) zgrt 8.8 rgs /r-s/

(10299) hq#$nw 8.8 sagia a-seg-ga sqh

(10312) h(q#$nw, h(q#$w 8.8; 9.5 saqu (?) saqalu essad sq

(9424) wx$# 4.13 sehu

My table below expresses these rare verbs as % parallel foreign roots.

Hymn (Σ 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.

Discussion of rare verbs within Amos' Hymn.

Rare verbs (possibly HLs) appear clustered within Amos' hymn. I briefly discuss some of the more

interesting cases below, their ANE origins and my hymn translation considerations.

5.9a gylbmh BDB-1234 'flashing forth' is equivalent to , Sumerian for 'drum'.31 The Sumerian

'Balag-Laments', (accompanied by thunderous drum-music), describe the destruction of cities by

flood, thunder and invasion.32

8.8d Contains three possible HLs, sharing ancient parallel roots: h#$rgnw BDB-1951 'cast out, drive

out, expelled'; (Ugaritic- /g-r- /; Sumerian- rii). This verb describes movement away from an

original position/state.

hq#$nw BDB-10299 'give drink, be irrigated' (Ugaritic- qh; Sumerian- a-seg-ga, sagia; Old

31 Cooper, J.S., 2006. Genre, Gender and the Sumerian Lamentation. Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 58, pp. 39-47,(footnote 6, p. 41); Dumbrill, R.J., 2005. The Archaeomusicology of the Ancient Near East, Trafford, Canada, pp.224-226.

32 Black, J.A., 1991. Eme-Sal Cult Songs and Prayers. Aula Orientalis Vol. 9, No. 9/1, pp. 23-36, (28).

Babylonian/Akkadian- sa qu). This verb is reminiscent of Gen 2.6 'a mist went up from the earth and

watered/irrigated the whole face of the ground.' I therefore translate hq#$nw as 'permeation'.

h(q#$nw BDB-10312 'sink down' (Ugaritic- sq; Sumerian- essad; Old Babylonian- saqalu). In

particular the Babylonian is said of 'rainfall or floodwater'.33 I translate h(q#$nw as 'subsided', which

may be applied to both Flood waters and light that decreases in strength.

9.6a. wytwl(m-wtwl(m (four times). BDB-7097 'step/stair/ascent' cf. Ezek 40.6) Paas recognized

Egyptian temple-throne allusions,34 I suggest nilometer allusions, where Nile floods were measured

by ascending steps.35 9.6 therefore describes ocean waters ascending to the heavens; an

immeasurable Flood, upon which YHWH ascended and sat enthroned (cf. Ps. 29.1-11). Smith

comments on Ancient Egyptian Demotic texts which describe massive Nile inundations 'ascending

to the mountains and hills', in theological terms of the Primeval Ocean from which all life emerged

at creation. Such texts bare striking resemblance to the Amos hymn, lending an authentic ancient

Egyptian influence.36

9.6b wtdg)w BDB-102 'band/thong'. 9.6a+b's language describes actions of ascent into the sky, then

descent back to earth i.e., active shapes 'bunch',37 also violent, 'troop' (fighting men, plural). I have

translated wtdg)w as 'plumes', to describe volcanic-plume imagery. Sumerian and Babylonian words

(gududu, sukud; zugud) include ideas of 'military troop', 'height', and possibly 'cauldron'.

Extents of Amos Hymnic-Fragments.

For these verses to be considered as separate literary units, their extents within Amos must be

33 CAD, Vol. 17ŠII, p. 12.34 Pass, S., 1993. He Who Builds His Stairs into Heaven. Ugarit Forshungen, Vol. 25, pp. 319-325.35 Bell, B., 1970. The Oldest Records of the Nile Floods. The Geographical Journal, Vol. 136, No. 4, pp. 569-573,

(572). Measurements are known from the 1st. Dynasty.36 Smith, M. On the Primaeval Ocean. The Carlsberg Papyri 5. (Museum Tuscalanum Press, Denmark, 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.116-117.

37 'bunch of hyssop', describes a shape, cf. Ex. 12.22.

established. Scholars generally regard the specified verses as the textual limits of the fragments. MT

preserves the nun division-marker 's' 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 Watts 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 composition', but 4.12c-13's transition

is not 'cumbersome', rather, highly significant when seen in covenant-treaty terms. 4.12c's 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 commanded to: 'Prepare to meet your God...' (cf. Exodus 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 strophe's limits 5.8-9. Is LXX to be preferred

over MT in Amos? Cramer rejected Watt's LXX reading.41 Gelston noted 'unusual concentration's 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 Watts' reliance

upon LXX, connecting 4.12c with 4.13 and 5.6-7 with 5.8 should be rejected. Localized names

'Israel' (4.12c); 'Joseph', and 'Bethel' (5.6) should not be included in a pre-Israelite hymn.

There is general agreement that a divine-name closed each verse.44 The clause YHWH em

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 Ibid, p. 35 (footnote 24). Watts admits Cramer rejects the LXX reading, even though vs. 7 'seems hymnic' in the

LXX.42 Gelston, A., 2002. Some Hebrew Misreadings in the Septuagint of Amos. Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp.

493-500, (495, 500).43 Arieti, J.A., 1974. The Vocabulary of Septuagint Amos. Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp. 338-347,

(340, 346).44 Wolff, Joel und Amos, 'formal characteristics of these passages especially stand out...the closure of several cola with

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

7.4 Vision-Report/ Hymnic-fragment.

Pass recognized 'striking relationship's between Amos' hymn and vision reports, showing Amos

structured his book around both,46 thereby linking 9.5b's melting earth with 7.4's fiery-vision. Szabó

recognized Flood traditions within Amos' hymn and 7.4's vision-report.47 I therefore propose 7.4

utilizes a hymn-fragment starting at 'Lo! Behold!', 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! (hnhw) 4.13a Lo!Behold! (hnh yk)

7.4b anay [YHWH] 9.5a anay [YHWH] sat

7.4c #$)b brl )rq 9.6c Myh yml )rqh

7:4c (called for judgment by fire) 9:6c (called for ocean waters)

7:4d Great Deep 9.6b beneath earth's foundations

7:4e consumed its portion. 9.5b struck... earth and it melted

Strong parallel themes, vocabulary and emphasized divine-names are common to Amos' vision-

report and hymn-fragments, indicating co-dependancy.

Amos' Hymn: Creation or De-creation?

Notable scholars,48 view the hymn-fragments as praise-doxologies to YHWH as Creator. I will

demonstrate these passages praise YHWH's judgments as De-creator. When scholars maintain a

'creation-praise-doxology' perspective, the verses' perceived positions within Amos automatically

'Yahweh (God of Hosts) is his name'', p. 215.45 Story, C.I.K., 1980. Amos. Prophet of Praise. Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 67-80 (69).46 Pass, S., 2002. Seeing and Singing: Visions and Hymns in the Book of Amos . Vetus Testimentum, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp.

253-274, (274).47 Szabó, A., 1975. Textual Problems in Amos and Hosea. Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 25, No. 2a., pp. 500-524, (504).48 John Calvin, Commentary on Joel, Amos, Obadiah. Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, pp. 259,

395-396; Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 39; Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies ofAmos, p. 23; Story, Amos. Prophet of Praise, p. 72.

appear to them as contextually: obtrusive, misplaced, later insertions, or replacement verses,49 so

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 fit their paradigm. Seasonal interpretations drive Watts' 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 (1.1) #$(rh (LXX σεισμοῦ)

depicts 'cosmic upheaval',52 (cf. 8.8a zgr). The context of 9.2-4 is Israel's vain attempt to escape

from YHWH's judgment, so 9.5-6 is the judgment's climax, a harvest-hymn certainly would seem

'miss-placed'.

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 five catastrophes (with growing intensity)'.53 Carny realized the hymn-

fragment's 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 Flood annihilation. 4.12's verbs are 'highly

military in character'; Israel must prepare to do battle with YHWH.55 So are the hymns creation-

49 Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, p. 23 'obtrusive'; Carny, P., 1977. Doxologies: A ScientificMyth. Hebrew Studies, Vol. 18, pp. 149-159. (150) 'misplaced'; Gordis, R., 1980. Studies in the Book of Amos.American Academy for Jewish Research, pp. 201-264 (226) 'later insertions'; Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 222.

50 Wood, J.R., 2002, Amos in Song and Book Culture. JSOT Supp. Series 337, Sheffield Academic Press. Wood goes asfar as saying the editor/commentator who later redacted Amos' prophecy 'contradicts' Amos (pp. 68, 78, 88, 90,123), and 'downplays' (78) Amos message of judgment, 'Editorial comments are added piecemeal and alter themeaning of Amos's final vision about the day of Yahweh' (77).

51 Watts, An Old Hymn Preserved in the Book of Amos, p. 38; Gaster, An Ancient Hymn in the Prophecies of Amos, p.23-6.

52 Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 342.53 Story, Amos. Prophet of Praise, p. 75.54 Carny, Doxologies: A Scientific Myth, p. 157.55 Hayes, J.H., 1988. Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet: His Times and his Preaching. Parthenon Press, Nashville, p.

149.

praise-doxologies? Gillingham reasons not. 'Amos' God comes as the destroyer of the natural order

He has created…[this] is seen in the doxologies..the evidence clearly shows that the purpose of all

three doxologies was to proclaim in hymnic form...Israel's God was able to create and to destroy'.56

Amos' Hymn: Wisdom Literature?

Crenshaw defined Wisdom Literature as 'based on experience.'57 It was the wise-man's function to

offer courtly advise from personal experience.58 Crenshaw demonstrated Amos utilized wisdom

motifs, which were particularly concentrated within the hymns. Specifically, Crenshaw analyzed

vocabulary used in Amos 5:8, 9; glb 'gleam, flash-forth,' occurs four times:- Psalm 39:13 (a

'wisdom Psalm'), and Job 9:27; 10:20, classical wisdom literature. twmlc 'shadow of death' occurs

17 times; Job (9 times); Psalms (4 times); Isa 9:2, Am 5:8 (once). d$# 'violence, ruin', occurs

exclusively in the wisdom literature and in Psalms.

Crenshaw critiques motifs identified by Wolff in his analysis of wisdom literature: stylistic usages

include 'woe oracles', and theological usages include 'an interest in astronomy' and 'Israel's end'; all

of which specifically 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 influences within Amos' hymn are not limited to

linguistics, but extend to theology. 'In a word, the faith of the wise is creation theology.'59 I would

add that Crenshaw's definition should include de-creation. Crenshaw asked if wisdom literature as a

genre sufficiently describes Amos hymn 'simply on the grounds of wisdom's basis in experience,'

56 Gillingham, S. 1991. 'Who Makes the Morning Darkness': God and Creation in the Book of Amos. Scottish Journalof Theology. Vol. 45, pp. 165-184, (167, 172).

57 Crenshaw, J.L. 1967. The Influence of the Wise upon Amos. Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschraft, Vol. 79, pp. 43-51., (44).

58 Ibid, cites McKane (1965) '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. Solomon's proverbs of natural observations related to life.

59 Ibid, pp. 49-50.

but was rather 'mediated through the ancient theophanic tradition?'60 Crenshaw later defined

creation's role within wisdom literature, and interests in the natural order (earthquake and storm)

that they 'link together theophanic tradition and wisdom.'61 I suggest 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 defined by use of divine names, in particular,

wisdom literature uses appelatives e, eha, ehim or sat as apposed to YHWH.62 However,

Amos' hymn uses a combination: ehi m+YHWH (4.13). Does Cassuto's definition deny Amos'

hymn of its Wisdom status? Maybe not. As previously mentioned, Jefferson discussed the high

percentage of Ugaritic roots contained in Psalm 110 etc. Jefferson identified 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 YHWH's title as a 'proper noun', the 'specific name of Israel's God,' compared to

ehi m, an appellative common noun applied to both Israel's God and heathen gods.65 I suggest

therefore Amos hymn was 'Yahwized', Personalizing it for Israel. I therefore bracket [YHWH] in my

translation, to indicate a theoretical editorial insertion.66

60 Ibid, p. 51.61 Crenshaw, J.L. 1967. Amos and the Theophanic Tradition. Mercer University, Macon, Georgia pp. 203-15, (214).62 Cassuto, U., 2008. The Documentary Hypothesis. Shalem Press, Jerusalem, p. 25.63 Gaster, T.H., 1937. Psalm 110. Journal of the Manchester University Egyptian and Oriental Society, 21, pp. 37-44.

Gaster suggested in praise of Ba'al, but offered no further linguistic support for this assertion, p. 44.64 Ibid, p. 23.65 Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis, p. 22.66 Jefferson, Is Psalm 110 Canaanite? 'It is tempting to see in [Psalm 110] an adaptation of Jebusite (sic) ritual used by

David when he became ruler of Jerusalem.' p. 156. Amos' hymn could therefore contain Davidic or Amosian redactions.

Amos' Hymn: Poetry or Prose?

Cassuto explains that Hebrew poetic literature only uses the Tetragrammaton, but in narrative

literature, (i.e., the Pentateuch's narrative sections, the earlier Prophets, Job's narrative section),

'Tetragrammaton and him are both used in close proximity. These are the facts'.67

Amos 4.13 combines 'YHWH+ehi m', 'in close proximity' as Cassuto requires for his definition of

narrative to be satisfied. YHWH is not singly used in Amos' hymn. The usage of divine names,

therefore, defines Amos' hymn as narrative.68 But if, as my previous remarks suggest, YHWH was

edited into the hymn, can we still define Amos genre?

Andersen & Freedman show Amos hymn does not posses features of classical poetry, i.e., regular

syllables or beat, line lengths vary widely, and parallelism is minimal. 'Attempts to find regular

verse forms without recourse to drastic emendation have not been successful'.69

Andersen & Freedman define Amos' hymn as narrative. 'Two fragments of a Flood narrative do

survive in 5.8b and 9.6b, where the use of the -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, 7.4's

'use of et and the definite article shows that it is composed in standard prose'.71 I summarize verb

tenses of Amos and Job's hymns below.

Tense Amos-Hymn

4 preterites 5.8; 9.6 Mkp#$yw; 7.4 lk)tw; 9.5 gwmtw

2 imperfects 5:9 )wby; 8:8 zgrt

3 perfects 5:8 Ky#$th; 7:4 yn)rh; 9:6 hrsy

9 -perfects 8:8 lb)w; htl(w; h#$rgnw; hq#$nw; h(q#$nw

67 Ibid, pp. 24-5.68 Job 9.13 refers to ʾĔlôah, though 9.5-9 does not directly use a divine-name.69 Andersen, Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, p. 454.70 Ibid, p. 453.71 Ibid, pp. 745-6.

7:4 hlk)w; 9:5 wlb)w; htl(w; h(q#$w

Tense Job-Hymn

3 imperfects 9:6 Nwclpty; 9:7 trzy; Mtxy

2 perfects 9:5 w(dy; skph

My table shows Amos hymn's use of the wāw-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 9

-perfects (future-tense), interspersed with 4 imperfect -consecutives (preterite, past-tense).

This odd tense-mixing is explained by MT's preservation of two different ancient Semitic tense

systems. Driver stated 'this strange phenomenon, whereby two tenses apparently exchange 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

Amos hymn's tense-mixing 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.

Covenant-treaty: an Exegetical Key?

Hillers surveyed ANE treaty documents to discover striking parallels within Biblical covenantal

passages, particularly the curse-formula. Sealing of promises by curses was characteristic of ancient

legal practice, curses were regarded as 'more important than blessings which were promised for

obedience', blessing-formula were ordinarily shorter than curse-formula.73

Hillers analyzed Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 for ANE treaty-patterns of blessings and curses

in list form, arguing that Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are 'essentially authentic ancient

Israelite curse-lists, they may profitably be drawn into the discussion of treaty-curses and the

prophets'.74 Hillers analyzed 20 ANE treaty-curses, successfully comparing them with the Sinai-

72 Weingreen, J., 1979. A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew, Oxford, Claredon. G. R. Driver's note pp. 252-3.73 Hillers, D.R., 1964. Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophets, (PhD dissertation). Rome PBI, p. 6.74 Ibid, p. 42.

treaty and writing-prophets. In particular I am interested in Hiller's identification of the flood treaty-

curse.

'The treaty-curse which calls for flooding of the infidel's land has close Old Testament parallels in

comparisons of a conqueror to a deluge...In Esarhaddon's annals, Enlil curses Babylon with a

terrible curse, and a flood destroys the city. "Like a deluge" (abubis, abubanis) is a fairly common

simile for the onrush of the king in the Assyrian royal inscriptions'.75 Once Hillers identified this

specific genre, he recognized similar flood-curse language in Isaiah 8.7 and Jeremiah 46.7-8; 47.2,

which describes YHWH's flooding of rebellious lands with invading armies.

I suggest Amos' hymn was utilized as a 'flood treaty-curse'; the most catastrophic in Amos' arsenal,

describing YHWH's seismic-theophany (1.1), and Israel's exilic 'flood' of invaders.76 The Noachian-

covenant involved salvation within the Ark of a faithful remnant. Amos' hymn was used to warn of

Israel's destruction, as when the Flood came, but YHWH's faithful remnant would be saved to enjoy

a restored Edenic world (9.11-15). I further establish the hymn's Flood relatedness by offering the

comparisons below.

Flood: an Exegetical Key?

I compare Amos' hymn, Job 9.5-[13], and Genesis' Flood-account to investigate common Flood

themes. Firstly, is Job's 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

75 Ibid, pp. 70-71.76 Cathcart K.J., Gordon, R.P., 1989. The Aramaic Bible, Vol. 14. The Targum of the Minor Prophets. Michael Glazier,

Inc., Delaware. Utilizing Flood-curse metaphor, Aramaic Targum Amos paraphrases 8.8; 9.5 as 'A king shall comeup against it with his army which is great like the waters of a river, and he shall cover it all and drive out itsinhabitants', pp. 93; 95.

77 Hartley, J.E., 1988. The Book of Job. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, Eerdmans,Michigan, p. 41; Smith, G.V., 1992. Is there a place for Job's wisdom in Old Testament Theology? Trinity Journal,Vol. 13, pp. 3-20, (13); Crenshaw, The Influence of the Wise upon Amos, pp. 49-50; Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 217.

78 Andersen, F.I., 1976. Job, an Introduction and Commentary. Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, p. 145.79 Lo, A., 2002. Job 28 as Rehetoric in the Context of Job 22-31. Vetus Testamentum, Glousestershire. Lo cites

Hartley; Habel, Westermann, Newsom; who view Job 9.5-13 as a single 'hymn', pp. 133-40.

was 'citing older sources'.80 Habel recognized Job's hymn describes 'an earthquake of such

cataclysmic proportions that the pillars of the earth totter'.81 Hartley saw 'language descriptive of

theophany'.82 Carny sees great similarities between Amos and Job's doxologies referring to their

'threats of doom', rather than praise.83 Cline noted Job 9.5-10's 'strict hymnic form', possessing five

introductory participles,84 (strikingly reminiscent of Amos 4.13's five participles). I present below

my thematic comparison of Amos, Job and Genesis' Flood account.

4.13 Amos-Hymn Ref. Genesis Flood Vs. Job-Hymn

a Lo! Behold! hnh 6.17 Lo! Behold! ynnh [12] [Lo! Behold! Nh]

b Former of mountains Myrh 7.20 mountains Myrh were covered 5 He removes the mountains Myrh

c Creator of wind xwr 8.1 God made a wind xwr 9 He made… the south [wind]

c Declarer of Adam's Md) thoughts 6.5 the thoughts of Adam's Md) heart [11] [I do not understand Him]

f He trod down Krdw 7.19 were covered 8b And treads Krwdw

f high places of the earth Cr)ytmb l( 7.19 on the earth Cr)h l( all high hills 8b on waves of the sea Myytmb l(

g [YHWH] ehe sat sem 9.26 YHWH ehe sem [13] [eha]

5.8

a formed Orion and Pleiades lysk hmyk 8, 9 made Pleiades and Orion hmyk lysk

b And overthrew Kphw 5b He overturns Mkph

c Making day Mwy dark as night hlyl 8.22 day Mwy and night hlyl not cease 7 the sun, and it does not rise

d He called for 6.17 I Myself am bringing 7 He commands

d waters of the ocean Myh Mym 6.17 Flood-waters Mym lwbm 8b waves of the sea My

e face of the earth Cr)h ynp 7.4b face of the earth hmr)h ynp 6 shakes the earth Cr)

5.9

a destruction upon the strong z( 6.4 became strong men [13b] [allies rz( of the proud]

b Devastating their defenses 6.13 I will destroy them with the earth Cr) 6 shakes the earth Cr) out of its place

7.4

a Lo! Behold! hnhw 6.17 Lo! Behold! ynnh [12] [Lo! Behold! Nh]

b anay [YHWH] called for 6.17 I Myself am bringing 7 He commands

d consumed the Great-Deep hbr Mwht 7.11 Great Deep hbr Mwht broken 6a shakes... earth out of its place Mwqm

8.8

a earth quake Cr) zgr 6a earth... its pillars tremble Cr) zygr

b all its inhabitants lament? 6.13 earth... filled with violence 13c [allies... lie prostrate beneath Him]

c All things arose as the light 8a spreads out the heavens

9.5

d everything arose htl(w 7.20 waters Mym prevailed...upwards hl(mlm 8b the high l( sea My

80 Gordis, R., 1978. The Book of Job, Moreshet, New York, p. 522.81 Habel, N.C., 1985. The Book of Job. The Old Testament Library. Westminster Press, Pennsylvania, p. 190.82 Hartley, The Book of Job, p. 169.83 Carny, Doxologies: A Scientific Myth, p. 154.84 Clines, D.J.A., 1989. Job 1-20. Word Biblical Commentary, Word, Dallas, p. 224.

d subsided h(q#$w like the River 8.1 the waters Mym subsided wk#$yw 8b treads upon the...sea My

9.6

a built... ascents wtwl(m 7.11 all the fountains Ny(m 8 spreads out the heavens Mym#$

e YHWH sem 9.26 YHWH ehe sem [13] [eha]

My comparison demonstrates strong vocabulary and thematic correlations between Amos, Job, and

Genesis 6-9. I further present an analysis of shared vocabulary (and their OT frequencies) between

Amos and Job's hymns.85

Shared Vocabulary Amos-Hymn Job-Hymn Frequency

hmyk 5.8a 9.9 3

lysk 5.8a 9.9 3

Krdw 4.13f 9.8 6

ytmb l( 4.13f 9.8 6

Myrh 4.13f 9.5 58

My 5.8d; 9.6c 9.8 254

Mym#$ 9.6a 9.8 394

hnh 4:13a; 7:4a [9:11, 12] 448

Cr) 4.13f; 5.8e; 8.8a; 9.5b, 9.6 b, d 9.6 1529

Amos and Job's hymns share much vocabulary, (including rare occurrences and five participles),

adding to the probability that both hymns are co-dependent literature.

Are Amos' Hymn's Divine Names Flood Related?

The hymn's divine names are unique and highly significant, occurring at the book's 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

85 Σ occurrences were established using Bible Works® 8.0 morphological searches.86 Byargeon, R.W., 1995. The Doxologies of Amos: A Study of their Structure and Theology. Theological Educator, Vol.

52, No. 1, pp. 47-56, (56).87 Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 341.88 Caroll, M.D., 1992. Contexts for Amos. JSOT Press, Sheffield, p. 217.

The Amos hymn's divine-title's roots are known from ANE sources (see table below). YHWH, is

unique to Israel.89

Hebrew BDB-Definition Akkadian, Babylonian Summarian Ugaritic

anay 147 'Lord, master' adn

ehe 482 'god, angel, ruler, judge' ilu il il

sem 10046 'name' semu sm

sat 7982 'host, army, war, warfare' sabu sbu

YHWH 2314 'Proper name God of Israel'

Crenshaw analyzed YHWH ehe sat sem (occurring twice in MT); YHWH sem (four

times)90; YHWH sat sem , (twelve times). Crenshaw summarized his findings: 'These passages

possess a striking formal similarity, manifest a surprising degree of uniformity of themes, and

appear to come from the same general period'.91 I present my analysis of these passages to

determine any Flood vocabulary/allusion they may contain.

Divine-Name Ref. Flood Allusion/Vocabulary

YHWH sem Ex. 15.3 (1, 4, 19, 20, 21: My), (5, 8: tmht, Mym)

Jer. 33.2 (20, 25: Noahic-covenant), (22: My)

Amo. 5.8f, 27

9.6e

(8d My, Mym), (24 Mym, lxn)

(9.6c My, Mym)

YHWH ehe sem Gen. 9.26 (2: My), (9-18: Noahic-covenant), (11: Mym), (11, 15: lwbm)92

YHWH sat sem Isaiah

47.4 (2: twhn yrb()

48.2 (13: Mym#$ hxp+), (18: rhn, Myh ylgk)

(21: Mym)

89 See later discussion.90 Crenshaw includes YHWH zikro Hos. 12.5. (9, 13; 13.4, 15 possess multiple-embedded Flood allusions, and 15

wny(m), p. 156.91 Crenshaw, J.L. 1969. YHWH sat sem : A Form-Critical Analysis. Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche

Wissenschaft, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 156-175, (156).92 Gen. 9:26 is not discussed by Crenshaw, but appears as a divine-name in Noah's priestly blessing of Shem.

51.15 (9: bhr), (10: My, Mym, Mwht br , Myqm(m-My, rb(),

(13: h+n Mym#$), (15 Myh, wylg)

54.5 (9: xn ym), (10: Myrhh), (11: hr(s)

Jeremiah

10.16 (12: Mym#$ h+n),93 (13: Mym Nwmh)

31.35 (35: Noahic-covenant, Myh, wylg)

32.18 (17, 21-23: multiple-embedded Flood allusions)

46.18 (7, 8: twrhnk, Mym; r)y, rhn, Mym), (18: My)

48.15 (32: My wrb(), (34: Mym)

50.34 (38: w#$byw hymym),94 (42: My)

51.19, 57 (13, 16, 55: Mybr Mymk Mhylg), (15: Mym#$ h+n),

(36, 42: brh My, rwqm)

[YHWH]

ehe sat sem

Amos

4:13e

(13a-c,f multiple-embedded Flood allusions)

Crenshaw stated regarding the sem affixed to the epithet that it 'derives from the theophanic

tradition.'95 My thematic analysis re-specifies Crenshaw's theophanic analysis to Flood-theophanic

vocabulary and metaphor, demonstrating a strong correlation, suggesting these '+sem ' epithets

represent unique Flood-theophanic divine-epithets and/or a known literary-device. Crenshaw cites

Wambacq who recognized Amos, Isaiah and Jeremiah may all have quoted from an 'ancient

hymn'.96 I suggest the representative of this literature is Amos' Flood-hymn, which presents a

literary key in tems of its use of Flood-epithets, so enabling identification of these OT examples.

The passages include Egypt, Red Sea and Jordan flood crossing motifs. Gunn comments on Isaiah

54.9-10's reference to Noah and the Flood, revealing Isaiah saw Israel's exile and deliverance as

being of the 'same order as the events of the [F]lood', being an 'event of great paradigmatic value for

93 Cf. Job 9.8; Zech 12.1.94 Cf. Gen 8.7, 13, 14.95 Crenshaw, YHWH sat sem (II Sam 7:5ff; Ex 20:24; 3:14; 6:2; 24:3ff; 33:19; 34:5f; Hos 12:9; 13:4), p. 168.96 Ibid, p. 158.

the people'.97

Gunn demonstrates metaphors such as sea-splitting, paths and crossings-over, all contain multiple

embedded allusions to the Ark's 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' Flood account where YHWH sent

a wind to dry up the Flood waters (Gen. 8.1b). Gunn asked 'if this primeval story was one of such

significance for the prophet, is it not likely that it has left its mark elsewhere in his poetry?'98 I

would suggest this is the case, with Amos Israel's first writing-prophet, blazing a trail from the start.

Covenant and Flood Exegetical-keys: Unlocking Meaning within Amos' Hymn?

My analysis demonstrates Amos' hymn describes the Flood. I will now provide the reader with two

exegetical keys to further test the hymn's Flood-relatedness, unlocking meaning within the hymn

and surrounding context. The first key is Covenant (plus treaty-curses), the second, Flood (plus

seismic-theophany). If my keys are valid they will unlock the hymn's contextual relationships and

develop a Flood-hymn Sitz-im-Leben. A condensed working commentary is presented below.

Hymn-fragment 4.13a-g

4.13a 'Lo! Behold!' (cf. 7.4a) emphasizes YHWH's action of initiating the Flood (cf. Gen. 6.17

ynnh). 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'.99 rcwy describes clay formed by a potter. Amos prophesied Israel would

be 're-formed', by the God who judged and re-formed the mountains during the Flood (Gen. 7.20).

Samaria's 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

97 Gunn, D.M., 1975. Deutero-Isaiah and the Flood. Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 94, No. 4, pp. 493-508, (493).98 Ibid, p. 493.99 Andersen, Freedman, Amos: A New Translation. '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', p. 453.

broken walls' (4.3a), a metaphor describing damage by earthquake and exile.

4.13c 'created wind'. YHWH sent a wind to dry up the Flood waters (Gen. 8:1). YHWH sent an 'east

wind' to part the Red Sea on behalf of His covenant people (Ex. 14.21, cf. Ex. 10.13). YHWH who

blew on Red Sea, and Flood, now blows upon Israel in judgment.

4.13d 'his thought' rx$#. YHWH declares to Israel what their thoughts are, (cf. 5.12-15). The pre-

Diluvian's thoughts were 'evil continually' (Gen. 6.5; 8.21), provoking the Flood judgment. Amos

judges Israel's complete degeneracy of thoughts and minds, they 'despised the law', not 'keeping the

commandments' (2.4).

4.13e 'Making dawn into darkness', YHWH's cosmic-scale theophanic-judgment (cf. 5.8b). The 'Day

of the Lord' (5.18, 20) meant 'darkness and not light…very 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 (Ex. 10.21-23). Egypt's plagues are turned against Israel for treaty-

violations in accordance with Deuteronomy 28.60. YHWH's judgment causes even daylight to fail

(cf. 4.13e; 5.8b,c, and 5.18, 20).

4.13f 'Tread' Krdw a military term. Israel 'treads down the poor' (5.11), therefore YHWH treads

down Israel. Leviticus 26.30 describes a covenant-curse unleashed upon Israel's cult centres, (cf.

Mic. 1.3). Bethel's alter-horns would be 'cut off' by earthquake (3.14-15). Amos reminds Israel there

is no where to escape YHWH of Hosts' wrath against her idolatrous religion. YHWH the mighty

conqueror, will tread/thresh down Bethel's alters (3.14; 5.5-6), as He trod down the mountains

during the Flood.

Hymn-fragment 5.8a-9b.

5.8a hmyk (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

YHWH's covenant-curses upon Israel (Deut. 5.6-10; 6.14-15). The God of Hosts alone must be

worshiped, not the host of gods!

lysk, (possibly Orion, 'fool/giant'100) 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 Flood),101 would evoke fear of cosmic-scale judgment within the

ancient Hebrew mind.

5.8b 'overthrew morning', Kphw binds the hymn grammatically to its context (5.7). Night becoming

morning cannot be viewed as punishment for Israel's 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). A reversal of the Noachian-covenant (Gen. 8:22b),

of dependable day-night cycles.102 Also considered 'eclipse' language,103 and a 'darkness covenant-

curse',104 comparable to Deuteronomy 28.29 'You shall grope at noonday…in darkness'. 5.8c

describes cosmic ramifications for Israel's sin.

100Clines, Job 1-20. Kesil associated with Orion the giant in Targum and Pesh., p. 231.101 Milikowsky, C., 1983. "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, Vol. 50, pp.105-132 (127).

102 Drazin, I., Wagner, S.M., 2006. Onkelos on the Torah. Genesis. Jerusalem, Gefen. Ibn Ezra comments on Genesis7.11 'The flood was so strong that it was impossible to distinguish between day and night, which is why Godpromised in His subsequent covenant (8.22) that "day and night will not cease''' p. 38.

103 Gillingham, 'Who Makes the Morning Darkness', p. 169; Cripps, R.S., 1969. A Critical and ExegeticalCommentary on the Book of Amos. London, SPCK, p. 248; Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209;Hubbard, D.A., 1989. Joel and Amos. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England,p. 222.

104 Wiseman, D.J., 1958. The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon, British Institute for the Study of Iraq, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.I-ii+1-99, (60, 66)

5.8e 'poured out'. Israel lays/casts-down righteousness to the earth (5.7), therefore judgment is

poured upon Israel. Hillers suggests the flood-treaty-curse,105 a metaphor of invasion (cf. 5.27; 6.7;

7.17). 'upon the face of the earth' (cf. 9.8) strikingly parallels Genesis' Flood account,106 revealing

the universality of YHWH's judgment on Israel's population and land. Amos' audience, aware of

Torah's Flood account, would appreciate the full implications of Amos' hymn's metaphor and

threatening use of it. Woods recognized 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)'.107

Hymn-fragment 7:4

Amos' Vision-Report parallels 8 motifs of fiery judgment associated with Amos' earthquake.108

7.4a. 'Lo! Behold!', connects this vision-report to hymn 4.13a, and YHWH's personal involvement at

the Flood (Gen. 6.17).

7.4c. 'Called for judgment by fire'. Andersen & Freedman sees a 'great similarity' between this

phrase and two calling for water phrases (5.8; 9.6).109

7.4d. YHWH's fire consumes the 'Great Deep', a specific Flood term,110 and its 'portion' qlxh

(BDB-3115). Andersen and Freedman explain 'portion' is 'typically used to describe a 'portion of

land', or 'inheritance', that which belongs to the inheritor, so must be something matching the Great

Deep... not a synonym, but a compliment.'111 Deuteronomy 32.9 describes Jacob as YHWH's

'portion' qlx. Andersen and Freedman suggest this 'portion' refers to all the nations involved in

Amos' prophecy where YHWH is sovereign, with Israel and Judah at the epi-centre.112

105 Cf. Isa 8.7; Jer 46.7-8, 47.2.106 Cf. Gen 6.7, 23; 7.3-4, 23; 8.9, 21; 11.8.107 Wood, J.R., 2002. Amos in Song and Book Culture. JSOT Sup. Series 337, Sheffield, UK, pp. 1-255, (66).108 Andersen, Freedman, Amos: A New Translation, (cf. Gen. 19.24; Amos 4.11), p. 748. Cf. Amos 1.4, 7, 10, 12, 14;

2.2, 5; 5.6.109 Ibid, pp. 746-7, cf. Deut. 32.22.110 Cf. Isa. 51.10, tehom also describes earth's depths Gen. 49.25; Deut. 33.13.111 Ibid, p. 747.112 Ibid, pp. 748-9.

Hymn-fragment 8.8.

8.8a. 'Did not the earth quake for this?' zgrt-)l. Cosmic-scale destruction is assured. The land

itself suffers for Israel's sins, and soon would spew them out as 'wormwood/bitterness' (5.7; cf.

6.12). Commentators generally recognize 8.8a's earthquake metaphor.113

8.8c. 'All things arose htl(w as the light r)k'. The subject is 8.8a 'the trembling land'. This

cannot refer to the Nile's natural irrigation as some scholars theorize.114 When compared with 8.14

'they shall fall and never rise again' (cf. 5.1-2); 8.8 is anything but 'seasonal'. Recognizing 8.8c's

'light' disturbance imagery links to 8.9's eclipse-language, thus binding text-to-context, suggesting

cosmological ramifications for Israel's sins in response to Israel's covenant violations (8.4-7).

8.8e (cf. 9.5e). 'River of Mizraim' Myrcm r)y. The juxtaposition of seismic-theophany next to Nile

seasonal-imagery has caused scholars some confusion. Cripps called 8.8 a 'perplexing simile',115

because earthquakes are sudden, compared to Nile flood seasons. Such 'perplexing similes' cannot

be resolved within a creation-praise-doxology understanding, the language describes a prolonged

and catastrophic judgment.116 8.8 clearly describes the year long Flood, metaphorically used by

Amos as a flood covenant-curse.

Hymn-Fragment 9.5

9.5b. 'He struck the earth and it melted'. (gwnh BDB-5885 'touch, reach, strike'. Amos' fire motifs,

are highly significant, describing YHWH's theophanic-judgments upon Israel and her neighbours for

their sins.117 (gwn, indicates 'catastrophic and permanent change' to the place being struck.118 Amos

reminds Israel using seismic-theophany language that YHWH descended at Sinai in smoke, fire and

113 Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209; Hammershaimb, The Book of Amos, p. 125. Cf. Job 9.6b theearth's 'pillars tremble'.

114 Ibid. Hammershaimb reasoned Amos never visited Egypt, not comprehending the Nile's behavior p. 125.115 Cripps, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, p. 246.116 Hayes, Amos the Eighth-Century Prophet, p. 209.117 Cf. 1.4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2.2, 5; 4.11; 5.6; 7.4.118 Story, Amos. Prophet of Praise, p. 76-77.

earthquake (Ex. 19.18), to ratify Israel's covenant (Ex. 24), now descends in fiery judgment to fulfill

its curses upon Israel as treaty violators.

9.5d,e (cf. 8.8c,d).

Verbs describing the rise and fall of the earth, like the Nile waters, are reminiscent of the rise and

fall of the Flood waters, 'everything arose' (htl(w); cf. Gen. 7.20 'waters prevailed..upwards'

(hl(mlm); 'subsided (h(q#$w) like the River', cf. Gen. 8.1 'the waters subsided' (wk#$yw). Context

must not be confused; the 'land' is the subject, which is disturbed, 'like the Nile', best understood as

vivid earthquake imagery.119

9.6a. 'He built ascending-ascents into heaven'. Escape from YHWH's wrath is impossible 'though

they climb up to heaven', YHWH will 'bring/cast them down' (9.2). Wolff described 9.6's imagery as

'unparalleled'.120 The verbs point towards the structure's height into the heavens as well as the depths

from which it ascends from beneath the earth.121 I conclude with Möller: 'Like the second fragment,

it features an allusion to the [F]lood (5.8b; 9.6b) and stresses the cosmic dimension of Yahweh's 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'.122

Conclusions

Amos, Israel's first writing-prophet, predicted Jerusalem's destruction and drew upon extant and

familiar literature for his book's 'template'. SCL came pre-packaged with flood 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 Flood narrative was utilized as a flood Covenant-Curse.

Analysis of these passages' use of -consecutive and divine names leads to the conclusion Amos'

119 Paul, A Commentary on the Book of Amos, p. 261.120 Wolff, Joel und Amos, p. 342.121 Andersen, Freedman, Amos: A New Translation. 'This structure is in the heavens but has been founded upon the

earth (or even the underworld); in other words its foundations are deep...cf. Ps. 78.69', p. 719.122 Möller, K., 2000. "Hear This Word against You": A Fresh Look at the Arrangement and the Rhetorical Strategy of

the Book of Amos. Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 499-518, (514).

hymn is prose, not poetry. The hymn's genre is further defined by its use of wisdom-specific

vocabulary, making it wisdom-prose, a rare genre. Comparisons with Job's wisdom Flood-hymn

9.5-9[-13] demonstrates probable co-dependancy.

Amos' Flood narrative seems to have started life as a cuneiform tablet within 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 Flood psalms);

-consecutive tense-mixing is further evidence of antiquity. Such a tablet(s) could well have

been stored in Jerusalem's temple library, before being redacted into Amos' prophecy as a potent

covenant-curse. I suggest this literature was also used within 7.4's fiery vision-report judging by its

use of -consecutive, common Flood vocabulary, and rare ANE parallel roots.

The context of Amos' hymn demands a treaty-curse understanding, specifically the flood-curse

identified by D. Hillers. The hymn's vocabulary is clearly Flood related when compared to Genesis

6-10. The strong correlation between '+sem ' compound divine names and Flood related verses

within the writing-prophets, suggests a unique divine-Flood epithet and literary device. Identifying

Flood 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 9:11-15's 'SCL like' restoration passage should be considered genuine to Amos' prophecy of

destruction and restoration.

Using SCL as his template, Amos carefully wove these ancient but familiar Flood verses like

strands into the literary fabric of his book, in order to punctuate, build structure, illustrate his vision

report 7.4, and provide a Flood covenant-curse, emphasizing his prophecy of imminent destruction

of a covenant violating Israel, but yet, with hoped for eschatological restoration.

Amos' prophecy was seismically fulfilled at 1.1 'two years before the earthquake' (c. 750 B.C.). The

political fulfillment was in 722 B.C. when Shalmaneser V besieged and captured Jerusalem (cf. II

Kings 17.3-7.). Isaiah (28.2) prophesied this event using strikingly 'Amosian' flood-curse/SCL

language.

'Behold the Lord hath a mighty and strong one which as a tempest of hail and a

destroying storm as a flood of mighty waters overflowing shall cast down to the earth

with the hand.' (Cf. vv.17-18).

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