Commentary on Amos 1:2

How does v. 2 relate to the following content?

Literary context matters for interpretation, but it isn’t always clear how one verse connects with its surrounding material. Verse two is clearly distinct from the introductory material provided in Amos 1:1, but how does it relate to the following verses?

If you look at the section headings in different versions of the Bible, you’ll see that translators and interpreters disagree. The NRSV and ESV group Amos 1:2 with the following verses. The NIV separates v.2 from the rest of Amos 1. While section headings in modern translations are not included in the original language, they do reflect serious interpretive reflection on the text.

It seems to me that the NIV correctly observes a distinction between v. 2 and the rest of the chapter. If you pay attention to who is speaking, you’ll notice that an unidentified person (though certainly Amos) speaks in v. 2, and YHWH speaks in v. 3 and following. This observation would indicate a distinction between the verses.

As we work through the rest of the chapter and book, we will keep in mind the nature of the relationship between v. 2 and the rest of the book of Amos.

For now, this one observation justifies my treatment of v. 2 as a singular unit.

Roaring Noise From Zion and Jerusalem

As you can see in my translation, I’ve organized Amos 1:2 into four lines (excluding “he said”). Much of Amos is Hebrew poetry, and this arrangement is a common structure for this type of literature. Instead of rhyming like English poetry, Old Testament poems feature something called parallelism. Parallelism describes the repetition of poetic lines that relate to one another in a variety of ways.

The first two lines are an excellent example of synonymous parallelism in a chiastic structure. (I know that’s a lot of technical language. See the definitions below for a better explanation.) Here’s how it works (FYI: This translation reflects the Hebrew word order):

YHWH roars from Zion

And from Jerusalem he gives his thundering.

The two lines say nearly the same thing, but the arrangement of the words and the slight differences are critical for understanding the emphases.

I’ve color-coded the verses so you can see how the parts are arranged in a sort of “X” shape. This literary strategy puts emphasis on the central portions, which reference Zion and Jerusalem. These two names are virtually synonyms for one another.

As Israel’s most holy city, Jerusalem and Zion symbolize God’s presence among the people. The temple is located here.

It’s important to remember that Amos is speaking to Israel, the Northern Kingdom. When Jeroboam led the ten tribes after their split from Judah, he erected new shrines for worship in Bethel and Dan. As far as the Israelites in the Northern Kingdom were concerned, they could worship God in any of these places.

Amos’s prophetic message against Israel begins with a reminder that YHWH dwells in Jerusalem on Mount Zion. God speaks to his people from this central location, not Bethel or Dan.

The outer portions of these two lines refer to YHWH roaring and “giving his thundering.” (I’ve translated this last phrase awkwardly on purpose.)

Often, the term “roar” refers to the sound a lion makes (see Judges 14:5; Isaiah 5:29; Jer 2:15; etc.). However, the metaphor in this verse more likely refers to thunder.

Consider the similarities between this verse and Job 37:4

וַיֹּאמַ֓ר׀ יְהוָה֙ מִצִּיֹּ֣ון יִשְׁאָ֔ג וּמִירוּשָׁלִַ֖ם יִתֵּ֣ן קֹולֹ֑ו

And the LORD said, YHWH roars from Zion and from Jerusalem he gives his thundering.

אַחֲרָ֤יו׀ יִשְׁאַג־קֹ֗ול יַ֭רְעֵם בְּקֹ֣ול גְּאֹונֹ֑ו וְלֹ֥א יְ֝עַקְּבֵ֗ם כִּֽי־יִשָּׁמַ֥ע קֹולֹֽו׃

After the roar of his voice, he thunders with his majestic voice and does not restrain them when his voice is heard.

As you can see from the color-coded translations above, these two verses use several of the same words. In Job 37:4, the relationship between YHWH’s roaring and thunder is more apparent because the Hebrew word for thunder is stated explicitly. (To be fair, an association between a lion’s roar and rolling thunder is certainly appropriate.)

The metaphor of thunder is quite powerful in this context. It calls the reader's mind to other dramatic moments in which God’s presence is associated with thunder. Consider Nahum 1:3-5 as an example:

The Lord is slow to anger but great in power,

and the Lord will by no means clear the guilty.

His way is in whirlwind and storm,

and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry,

and he dries up all the rivers;

Bashan and Carmel wither,

and the bloom of Lebanon fades.

In these verses, Nahum depicts God in ways reminiscent of ancient Near Eastern storm gods. YHWH’s presence is like a whirling storm. Verse 4 is particularly Important for the current issue. The result of God’s storm is the withering of Carmel, the same phenomenon Amos describes in v. 2b (”and the top of Carmel dries up”).

The word I translated as “thundering” is typically translated as “voice” in this passage, but it can also refer to “thunder,” especially with the Hebrew phrase used in this verse. In his commentary on Hosea–Jonah, Douglas Stuart offers numerous verses that could support this translation (Stuart 1987, 301):

Exodus 9:23 (NRSV)

Then Moses stretched out his staff toward heaven, and the Lord sent thunder and hail, and fire came down on the earth. And the Lord rained hail on the land of Egypt;

Psalm 18:13 (NRSV)

The Lord also thundered in the heavens,

and the Most High uttered his voice.

**While the NRSV translates this as “voice,” several ancient manuscripts add the phrase “hailstone and coals of fire” to make the storm imagery of “voice” more clear.

Shepherd’s Pastures Mourning and the Top of Carmel Drying Up

Amos packs so much into this verse, and we’ve only made it through the first two lines. The next two lines are similarly loaded with significance.

And the shepherd’s pastures mourn (אבל),

And the top of Carmel dries up.

First, it’s important to recognize the causal relationship between the two halves of v. 2. The first two lines describe YHWH’s action, and the second two lines identify the results.

As with the image of “roaring” and “thunder,” Amos selects an interesting word to describe what happens to the shepherd’s pastures. Most translations use the word “whither,” which is certainly the agricultural implication Amos intends. Yet there are at least three reasons to translate the word as “mourn.”

1) The Old Testament personifies inanimate objects and uses the same word (אבל) to them as mourning several times.

Isaiah 3:26

And her gates shall lament and mourn (אבל); ravaged, she shall sit upon the ground.

Jeremiah 12:11

They have made it (vineyard) a desolation; desolate, it mourns (אבל) to me. The whole land is made desolate, but no one lays it to heart.

2) The context of judgment and dread should induce grief and mourning.

Arnulf Baumann writes, “It is important to note that all HB uses of אבל in the context of vegetation are in the prophetic literature and refer to calamity” (Baumann, 48).

3) The Septuagint translates the term with a Greek word (ἐπένθησαν) that means “to mourn.”

While Amos blends the metaphor of withering and mourning in the third line, he makes home the disastrous affect of YHWH’s thundering voice on the land. He declares that the top of Carmel dries up.

Carmel was known for its fertility. Even after years of drought, Elijah found enough water on Mount Carmel to drench the altar three times and fill a trench around it (1 Kgs 18:33-35). As Douglast Stuart notes, “A drought so total as 1:2 depicts represents a horrific fulfillment of the Pentateuchal drought curses (Lev 26:19; Deut 28:22–24)” (Stuart, 301).

Beyond the details of each line, Amos constructs the second half of verse 2 intentionally. Since pastures would often be at lower elevations and Carmel was a mountainous area in the Northern Kingdom of Israel, Amos creates something called a merism. By picking elevations at opposite ends of the spectrum, Amos indicates that the disastrous effects of God’s judgment will effect the entirety of Israel.

Conclusion

We’ve covered a lot of ground in just this one verse. So, let me summarize some of the key takeaways.

1. God’s presence remains in Jerusalem with the Davidic kingdom, and he directs his judgment against Israel for their covenant violations.
2. God’s thunderous voice brings terrible judgment on the land of Israel. Rain typically accompanies thunder, but YHWH’s thunder brings a disastrous drought on Israel.
3. No part of Israel will escape God’s judgment. From the depths to the heights, God’s punishment for Israel will be thorough.
4. Creation is harmed and mourns because of humanity’s sinfulness.

Definitions

• Parallelism - the defining characteristic of Hebrew poetry in which consecutive lines exist in a synonymous, antithetical, or synthetic relationship.
• Synonymous parallelism - A type of parallelism in which two lines say something that are quite similar in meaning
• Chiastic structure - a poetic technique that puts items in an “X-shaped” pattern. (A, B, B’, A’)
• Septuagint - a Greek translation of the Old Testament that was completed before the time of Jesus.
• Merism - a poetic device that indicates the totality of something (e.g., from my head to my toes = my whole body; from A to Z = everything)

Works Cited

• Douglas Stuart, Hosea–Jonah, vol. 31 of Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1987).
• M. Daniel Carroll R., The Book of Amos, ed. E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr., New International Commentary on the Old and New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2020).
• Shalom M. Paul and Frank Moore Cross, Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1991).