The main purpose of reading a biblical book is not to understand how it came into being (i.e., the historical-critical question), but rather to understand its meaning in its final literary form. The book of Amos is written as an epic narrative in dramatic mode. When read linearly as a narrative, the first six chapters raise questions that are answered in the final three chapters. The main questions concern the future fate of the nations and of the small peasants who were victims of the upper class and are affected again by God’s punishment of Israel. The final section of the book provides the answer. The peasants will live in peace and abundance, and the nations will have a future under God’s protection.
See also Amos (Kohlhammer, 2025).
By Rainer Kessler
Professor Emeritus of Old Testament
University of Marburg
December 2025
Methodological Questions
How should we read a prophetic book? How should we read the book of Amos?
Since certain books had become “holy books” with an authoritative, or even canonical, character, they were read as messages from God, transmitted by figures such as Moses, David, and the prophets. Sometimes, these figures were referred to by name. However, the names are not essential. For example, the so-called Damascus Document from Qumran, edited around 100 bce, quotes Amos 5:26–27. However, it does not mention the prophet’s name. It simply introduces the quotation with the words: “As he said:...” (García Martínez and Tigchelaar 1997, 561). The same verses from Amos are quoted in Acts 7:42–43. Again, the personal name is omitted. The introduction to the quotation reads: “As it is written in the book of the prophets:...” (all biblical quotations are from NRSVue; “the Lord” is replaced by “Yhwh”). Acts 15:15–18 quotes Amos 9:11–12 (together with a few words from Jeremiah 12:15 and Isaiah 45:21), with the introduction: “the words of the prophets, as it is written.” This approach to reading may be termed “pre-critical” or “naïve.” It makes no distinction between God or the holy spirit as “true” author of the text, the human speaker, whose mention can be omitted, and the text itself.
Historical criticism began with the questioning of the traditional attribution of certain texts to particular authors. For instance, did Moses actually write the books of the Torah, including the account of his own death and burial (Deuteronomy 34)? Did David really compose and sing all the psalms attributed to him? Were all the words in the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, or the Twelve actually spoken by the prophet whose name the book bears? The distinction was made between the “authentic” words of the prophets – their ipsissima verba – and later additions. The results of scholarly research are extremely divergent. According to Daniel Carroll R., “[t]he book of Amos is a literary creation that goes back largely to the prophet himself” (Carroll R. 2020, 52). In contrast, Göran Eidevall makes a marked distinction between the historical person Amos and the literary character called Amos, arguing that “[w]e have no direct access to the eponymous seer/prophet” (Eidevall 2017, 7).
The historical question, however, can no longer be ignored. Distinguishing between and dating the different layers of texts is crucial for any kind of historical research. Without dating texts, it would be impossible to reconstruct the history of biblical literature, religious and theological thinking, or ethical convictions. Similarly, the history of prophecy could not be reconstructed without distinguishing between layers and dating them. However, distinguishing between authentic words and additions, and dating individual texts, is neither the starting point nor the ultimate objective of interpreting biblical books. Even authors whose research yields different results generally agree that the starting point and goal of interpretation is the book itself.
A book is a text. Reading a book as a text is not the same as using it for historical reconstruction. When reading a book as a text, the reader does not attribute different value to the distinct levels of the text. The text itself (i.e., the book of Amos), the implied or explicit speaker (the prophet Amos, as in “The words of Amos,” Amos 1:1), and the authority behind the speaker (“Thus says Yhwh:...,” Amos 1:3), are all given the same value. Following Paul Ricœur, this approach to reading could be termed a “second naiveté,” a naiveté that is “post-critical rather than pre-critical”; it is “a learned naiveté” (Ricœur 1965, 477–78: une seconde naïveté, post-critique et non point pré-critique; c’est une docte naïveté).
The Book of Amos: An Epic Narrative in Dramatic Mode
The specific character of a given text can be identified by paying attention to certain signals. In the book of Amos, the first verse introduces the speaker of the following words. Amos 1:1 does not constitute a complete sentence. Instead, it is a “heading” (Andersen and Freedman 2008, 183) or “superscription” (Eidevall 2017, 79, 91; Carroll R. 2020, 115). It introduces what follows as “the words of Amos.” Amos is described as having a particular profession and hailing from a place called Tekoa. His words have an addressee (Israel) and refer to two dates: the reigns of certain kings in Judah and Israel, and “two years before the earthquake.”
As in a drama, the next verse gives the floor to the prophet: “And he said:...” (Amos 1:2). Amos’ speech begins with a few words about Yhwh. Then, the prophet hands over to Yhwh himself: “Thus says Yhwh:...” (Amos 1:3). Yhwh’s speech ends in 2:16, marked by “...says Yhwh.” Amos 3:1 opens a new section. The prophet takes the floor again and summons his listeners to hear Yhwh’s word: “Hear this word that Yhwh has spoken against you...” Immediately after this opening, the floor is given to Yhwh again who says, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities” (Amos 3:2). Throughout chapters 3–6, there is a fluid change between the prophet and Yhwh as speakers. The divine speaker is often marked by clear signals such as “says Yhwh” (3:10; 4:3, 6, etc.), or “Thus says Yhwh” (3:12; 5:3), or simply the divine “I.” Likewise, the prophet is identified as the speaker when he refers to God in the third person. In many cases, however, it is unclear whether God or the prophet is speaking. Their words merge. Yhwh speaks through his prophet; the prophet speaks with Yhwh’s authority.
The final words of chapters 3–6 belong to Yhwh and are marked by the phrase “says Yhwh, the God of hosts” in 6:14. In 7:1, the prophet takes the floor again. However, the nature of his words differs greatly from that found in chapters 3–6. Rather than simply introducing divine speech or referring to God in the third person, the prophet now gives a report of visions that he had seen: “This is what the Lord Yhwh showed me...” Dialogue between Yhwh and the prophet forms part of these vision reports. This new element, which was completely absent from chapters 1–6, forms an integral part of the report. In 7:1–9, three such visions are referred to.
For the first time after the heading, the narrator takes the floor again in 7:10–17. He introduces a new character: Amaziah the priest of Bethel. The short narration that follows is structured like “a little drama” (Tucker 1973, 425; cf. Casagrande 2019): “And Amaziah said to Amos...” (7:12), followed by “Then Amos answered Amaziah...” (7:14). After the narration, Amos continues by reporting another vision. As in chapters 3–6, chapters 8–9 alternate between words of the prophet (“This is what the Lord Yhwh showed me,” 8:1; “I saw Yhwh standing beside the altar,” 9:1) and the words of God. From 9:7 onwards, only Yhwh speaks. The final words of the book are “says Yhwh your God” (9:15).
In summary, the book of Amos is a narrative. The anonymous narrator recounts how Amos delivered his message (1:2–7:9), how Amaziah sent a message to the king and engaged in dialogue with Amos (7:10–17), and how Amos continued to speak afterwards. There is hardly any action in the narrative, which consists mainly of speeches by just two characters: Amos and Amaziah. However, Amos often gives the floor to God. God thus becomes a third speaker, but on a different narrative level. The narrator of the book never introduces God, but Amos always does, presenting him as one of the figures in the narrative.
The book’s absolute dominance of direct speech makes it comparable to a drama. However, since the speeches are integrated into the narrative, the book of Amos is not a true drama, but rather an epic narrative in dramatic mode (Casagrande 2023, esp. pp. 70–83).
Reading Amos 1–6: Questions
A narrative is usually read from beginning to end. As one reads linearly, questions are raised that are answered later.
As we have seen, after the heading, Amos begins in narrative form: “And he said” (1:2). Amos’s first utterance is a “motto” (Eidevall 2017, 91) or “summary oracle” (Carroll R. 2020, 120) followed by a composition of eight strophes known as “the oracles against the nations” (1:3–2:16). The final strophe, which is directed against Israel, is much longer than the preceding strophes against six foreign nations and against Judah, and is the target of the composition. Israel is threatened by a military catastrophe. Chapters 3–6 further criticize Israel’s behavior. The military catastrophe is said to lead to exile (6:7) and oppression by a foreign nation (6:14), which marks the end of the composition.
Reading chapters 1–6 in sequence raises questions that remain unanswered within the chapters themselves. The first concerns the fate of the nations. The text of the oracles against the nations (Amos 1–2) mention Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, the Ammonites, Moab, Judah, and Israel. All strophes have an identical opening: “For three transgressions of X, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment.” With the exception of the Israel strophe, Yhwh, the speaker of the oracles, threatens the nations with identical words: “So I will send a fire on...” (one variation occurs in 1:14: “I will kindle a fire against...”). The targets of destruction are always military structures (gate bars, the wall [1:5, 7, 10, 14]), the palaces of the ruling class (KJV; NRSVue has “strongholds”; Andersen and Freedman 2008, 229, etc. and Carroll R. 2020, 138, etc.: “citadels”; Eidevall 2017, 98, etc.: “fortresses”), and members of the elite (“the one who holds the scepter” [1:5, 8]; “their king” and the “officials” [1:15; 2:3]; “the ruler” [2:3]). Even expressions such as “the people of Aram” (1:5) and “the remnant of the Philistines” (1:8) may refer not to the entire population but to the respective armies (Kessler 2025, 58, 60). None of the oracles speak of the total destruction of any of the nations. What will their future fate be? This question remains unanswered until the end of the book of Amos (9:7, 12).
The same is true for the second question raised in chapters 1–6. Yhwh and his prophet Amos side with the needy, poor, and oppressed in Israel (cf. 2:6–8; 3:9–10; 4:1; 5:7, 10–12). Therefore, it is unsurprising that God threatens the wealthy oppressors with the plundering of their palaces (3:11) and exile (4:2–3; 6:7). However, military aggression and natural disasters do not distinguish between oppressors and the oppressed, or between the rich and their victims. A catastrophe never touches only the culprits with surgical precision. By the end of chapters 1–6, it is clear that the entire nation of Israel is threatened with destruction, occupation, and exile. Because the prophet sees Yhwh as the true agent behind the impending catastrophes, it raises the question of God’s justice: “Why will everyone, even those who endure oppression, suffer the judgment of invasion and earthquake?” (Carroll R. 2020, 96). Will the poor and needy become “victims twice over” (Carroll R. 2020, 95)?
Reading Amos 7–9: Answers
The answers to these two questions are provided in chapters 7–9. The question of God’s justice is addressed in the account of the visions, which includes the short story of Amaziah’s intervention. Visions one and two speak of God’s readiness to forgive. “It shall not be, said Yhwh” (7:3, 6). The object of divine regret is called “Jacob.” In his dialogue with God, Amos argues that Jacob “is so small” (7:2, 5). He is obviously referring to the peasants who cannot survive without the harvest, which is threatened by locusts and drought, both of which are about to be sent by Yhwh (cf. Kessler 2025, 212). Amos’s intercession on behalf of “Jacob,” who “is so small,” is successful. “Yhwh relented concerning this” (7:3, 6).
Visions three and four abruptly reveal the end of God’s mercy. “I will spare them no longer,” Yhwh says twice (7:8; 8:2). Amos does not intercede. God’s aggression is no longer directed at the land of the peasants, but rather at the institutions of the upper class: the sanctuaries, the royal house (7:9), and the temple or palace (8:2). The behavior of the ruling elite, criticized by Amos in chapters 1–6, forces Yhwh to intervene, affecting the entire population. However, the main reason for the inevitability of the end (8:2) is given in the story of Amos’s expulsion from Bethel, which is located between the third and fourth vision accounts (7:10–16). When the word of God spoken by his prophet is silenced, hope disappears: “...once Amaziah expels Amos from the northern kingdom, there is no more intercession and no more hope for Israel” (Smith 2025, 296).
Yet, there is a hint that the end brought about by the actions of the ruling and wealthy classes is not God’s final word. Even in announcing the absolute catastrophe, God calls Israel “my people” (8:2). These words establish a connection to the final verses of the Book of Amos, which ultimately address the questions posed in chapters 1–6.
In the fourth vision, God declares that “the end has come upon my people Israel” (8:2). The new reproaches in 8:4–14 and the fifth vision further emphasize the hopeless situation. However, in 9:7, God states that Israel belongs to him as much as other nations do. “Do you not belong to me as much as the Cushites, you children of Israel?” – saying of Yhwh (own translation; Carroll R. 2020, 490, who has the traditional translation “Are you not like the Cushites to me?,” quotes the Targum: “Children of Israel, are you not regarded as beloved children before me?”). God reiterates what he said in 3:1: “Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt?” Surprisingly, however, God claims to have a special history with other nations as well. He claims to have brought “the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir.” The Arameans and Philistines are the first nations addressed in the oracles against the nations (1:3–8). God’s relationship with Israel has not ended, nor will the nations be exterminated; God has his own history with them.
However, Israel’s history will not continue as before. God will destroy the “sinful kingdom,” but not “the house of Jacob” (9:8). The political entity (the sinful kingdom) responsible for Israel’s calamity will perish, but not the people (the house of Jacob) (cf. Carroll R. 2020, 500). God “will raise up the booth of David that is fallen” (9:11). This formulation is noteworthy because it does not mention the “house of David,” as one might expect. Probably the speaker wants to avoid any association with a “Davidic empire.” A booth provides protection, and nothing more. Under this protection, the people will live in security and abundance. This abundance is not the luxury enjoyed by the idle upper class, who were criticized in the preceding chapters. Rather, it is the well-being of the working peasants, who will eventually be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor in peace (9:13–15).
The nations will also benefit from the protection of the “booth of David.” While the future Davidic kings will “possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations,” the remnant of Edom and the nations are said to be “called by my name” (i.e., Yhwh’s) (9:12). Being called by someone’s name signifies ownership and protection. “This verse announces that others will be brought into communion with Yahweh and his people so that ‘possession’ here need not entail violent subjugation” (Carroll R. 2020, 513).
The final section of the book of Amos portrays a future in which God’s people will live in peace. They will no longer be oppressed by the “sinful kingdom” (9:8) or exploited by the “sinners of my people” (9:10). Instead, they will live under the protection of the “booth of David” (9:11). The “remnant of the nations” will no longer threaten God’s people either. Instead, they will be part of the Davidic kingdom and live under God’s protection.
A Consequent Ending to the Book
Since Wellhausen’s 1892 commentary on the Minor Prophets, scholars have often interpreted the ending of the book of Amos as weakening the prophet’s harsh message and as a revocation of earlier announcements of doom. Wellhausen’s poetic words were often cited: “Roses and lavender instead of blood and iron” (Wellhausen 1963, 96: “Rosen und Lavendel statt Blut und Eisen”).
Reading the book as a narrative that develops from the beginning to the end yields a different understanding. The final section of the book does not revoke the prophet’s message; rather, it answers the questions raised throughout the reading. The answer is not the restitution of earlier circumstances. Nothing is revoked, but everything will be transformed. “The corrupt structures of rule will be removed as well as those who prompt social reproach. No new imperial rule will be set up, but security will be guaranteed. And the nations no longer figure only as enemies but have a part to play in God’s work” (Kessler 2025, 266). Having understood this, one should start reading the book again from the beginning, but now in the light of its ending.
Bibliography
Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. Amos. AB 24A. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.
Carroll R., M. Daniel. The Book of Amos. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020.
Casagrande, Alessandro. “‘A Little Drama’ (G. M. Tucker): Zur literarischen Form von Am 7,10–17.” BZ 63 (2019): 195–219.
Casagrande, Alessandro. Das Amosbuch als epische Erzählung im dramatischen Modus: Ein Beitrag zu den synchronen Lesarten der Prophetenbücher. FAT II/141. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2023.
Eidevall, Göran. Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. AB 24G. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017.
García Martínez, Florentino, and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. Volume One 1Q1 – 4Q273. Leiden: Brill, 1997.
Kessler, Rainer. Amos. IECOT. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 2025.
Ricœur, Paul. De l’interpretation: essai sur Freud (L’ordre philosophique). Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1965.
Smith, Katherine E. “Tradition History and the Amaziah Narrative: Ideology, Theme, and Terminology in Amos 7.” Pages 295–306 in The Twelve Among the Prophets: A Festschrift in Celebration of James D. Nogalski, eds. Nicholas R. Werse, Anna Sieges, and Aaron Schart. BZAW 569. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2025.
Tucker, Gene M. “Prophetic Authenticity: A Form-Critical Study of Amos 7:10–17.” Interpretation 27 (1973): 423–434.
Wellhausen, J. Die Kleinen Propheten. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1963 (reprint of 3rd edition 1898; 1st edition 1892).